Switch to: References

Citations of:

Too self-fulfilling

Analysis 61 (2):141–146 (2001)

Add citations

You must login to add citations.
  1. Explaining the placebo effect: Aliefs, beliefs, and conditioning.Matthew Haug - 2011 - Philosophical Psychology 24 (5):679-698.
    There are a number of competing psychological accounts of the placebo effect, and much of the recent debate centers on the relative importance of classical conditioning and conscious beliefs. In this paper, I discuss apparent problems with these accounts and with?disjunctive? accounts that deny that placebo effects can be given a unified psychological explanation. The fact that some placebo effects seem to be mediated by cognitive states with content that is consciously inaccessible and inferentially isolated from a subject's beliefs motivates (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   2 citations  
  • Knowledge and Belief in Placebo Effect.Daniele Chiffi & Renzo Zanotti - 2017 - Journal of Medicine and Philosophy 42 (1):70-85.
    The beliefs involved in the placebo effect are often assumed to be self-fulfilling, that is, the truth of these beliefs would merely require the patient to hold them. Such a view is commonly shared in epistemology. Many epistemologists focused, in fact, on the self-fulfilling nature of these beliefs, which have been investigated because they raise some important counterexamples to Nozick’s “tracking theory of knowledge.” We challenge the self-fulfilling nature of placebo-based beliefs in multi-agent contexts, analyzing their deep epistemological nature and (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   8 citations  
  • 'About' puzzles, muddles and first person inferences.Peter Cave - 2005 - Philosophical Investigations 29 (1):51–72.
    Often we have coarsely grained knowledge: for example, we know about how many people are present. In possessing such knowledge, we also have finer grained knowledge of what is not: there certainly is nothing like that number of people here. The combination of such knowledge types, through sorites, generates contradiction and bafflement. This paper seeks to resolve the bafflement: it rejects a Timothy Williamson proposal, introduces muddle numbers and inference gaps, and shows how the different grains of knowledge do not (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   1 citation