Switch to: References

Add citations

You must login to add citations.
  1. The game of inquiry: the interrogative approach to inquiry and belief revision theory.Emmanuel J. Genot - 2009 - Synthese 171 (2):271-289.
    I. Levi has advocated a decision-theoretic account of belief revision. We argue that the game-theoretic framework of Interrogative Inquiry Games, proposed by J. Hintikka, can extend and clarify this account. We show that some strategic use of the game rules generate Expansions, Contractions and Revisions, and we give representation results. We then extend the framework to represent explicitly sources of answers, and apply it to discuss the Recovery Postulate. We conclude with some remarks about the potential extensions of interrogative games, (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   21 citations  
  • Using conceptual spaces to model the dynamics of empirical theories.Peter Gärdenfors & Frank Zenker - 2011 - In Erik J. Olson Sebastian Enqvist (ed.), Belief Revision meets Philosophy of Science. Springer. pp. 137--153.
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   20 citations  
  • Abductive belief revision in science.Gerhard Schurz - 2011 - In Erik J. Olson Sebastian Enqvist (ed.), Belief Revision meets Philosophy of Science. Springer. pp. 77--104.
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   11 citations  
  • A Structuralist Framework for the Logic of Theory Change.Sebastian Enqvist - 2011 - In Erik J. Olson Sebastian Enqvist (ed.), Belief Revision meets Philosophy of Science. Springer. pp. 105--135.
    Belief revision theory and philosophy of science both aspire to shed light on the dynamics of knowledge – on how our view of the world changes in the light of new evidence. Yet these two areas of research have long seemed strangely detached from each other, as witnessed by the small number of cross-references and researchers working in both domains. One may speculate as to what has brought about this surprising, and perhaps unfortunate, state of affairs. One factor may be (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   10 citations  
  • Changing minds about climate change: Belief revision, coherence, and emotion.Paul Thagard & Scott Findlay - 2011 - In Erik J. Olson Sebastian Enqvist (ed.), Belief Revision meets Philosophy of Science. Springer. pp. 329--345.
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   5 citations  
  • AGM Theory and Artificial Intelligence.Raúl Carnota & Ricardo Rodríguez - 2011 - In Erik J. Olson Sebastian Enqvist (ed.), Belief Revision meets Philosophy of Science. Springer. pp. 1--42.
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   2 citations  
  • Knowledge as True Belief.Isaac Levi - 2011 - In Erik J. Olson Sebastian Enqvist (ed.), Belief Revision meets Philosophy of Science. Springer. pp. 269--302.
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   2 citations  
  • Epistemic Erotetic Search Scenarios.Paweł Łupkowski, Ondrej Majer, Michal Peliš & Mariusz Urbański - 2018 - Logic and Logical Philosophy 27 (3):301-328.
    The aim of this paper is to introduce erotetic search scenarios known from Inferential Erotetic Logic by using the framework of epistemic erotetic logic. The key notions used in this system are those of askability and epistemic erotetic implication. Scenarios are supposed to represent all rational strategies of an agent solving the problem posed by the initial question where the interaction with an external information source is seen as a series of updates of the agent’s knowledge.
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   1 citation  
  • Rationality in Flux–Formal Representations of Methodological Change.Jonas Nilsson & Sten Lindström - 2011 - In Erik J. Olson Sebastian Enqvist (ed.), Belief Revision meets Philosophy of Science. Springer. pp. 347--356.
    A central aim for philosophers of science has been to understand scientific theory change, or more specifically the rationality of theory change. Philosophers and historians of science have suggested that not only theories but also scientific methods and standards of rational inquiry have changed through the history of science. The topic here is methodological change, and what kind of theory of rational methodological change is appropriate. The modest ambition of this paper is to discuss in what ways results in formal (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  • A Note on Theory Change and Belief Revision.Bengt Hansson - 2011 - In Erik J. Olson Sebastian Enqvist (ed.), Belief Revision meets Philosophy of Science. Springer. pp. 155--162.
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   1 citation  
  • Functional vs. Relational Approaches to Belief Revision.Erik J. Olsson - 2011 - In Erik J. Olson Sebastian Enqvist (ed.), Belief Revision meets Philosophy of Science. Springer. pp. 253--268.
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  • Reasoning About Belief Revision.Caroline Semmling & Heinrich Wansing - 2011 - In Erik J. Olson Sebastian Enqvist (ed.), Belief Revision meets Philosophy of Science. Springer. pp. 303--328.
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   1 citation  
  • Rational Belief Changes for Collective Agents.David Westlund - 2011 - In Erik J. Olson Sebastian Enqvist (ed.), Belief Revision meets Philosophy of Science. Springer. pp. 213--224.
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  • (1 other version)The Best of All Possible Worlds.Emmanuel J. Genot - 2011 - In Erik J. Olson Sebastian Enqvist (ed.), Belief Revision meets Philosophy of Science. Springer. pp. 225--252.
    Erik J. Olsson and David Westlund have recently argued that the standard belief revision representation of an epistemic state is defective. In order to adequately model an epistemic state one needs, in addition to a belief set K and an entrenchment relation E, a research agenda A, i.e. a set of questions satisfying certain corpus-relative preconditions the agent would like to have answers to. Informally, the preconditions guarantee that the set of potential answers represent a partition of possible expansions of (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  • Idealizations, intertheory explanations and conditionals.Hans Rott - 2011 - In Erik J. Olson Sebastian Enqvist (ed.), Belief Revision meets Philosophy of Science. Springer. pp. 59–75.
    Drawing inspiration from Lakatos’s philosophy of science, the paper presents a notion of intertheory explanation that is suitable to explain, from the point of view of a successor theory, its predecessor theory’s success (where it is successful) as well as the latter’s failure (where it fails) at the same time. A variation of the Ramsey-test is used, together with a standard AGM belief revision model, to give a semantics for open and counterfactual conditionals and ’because’-sentences featuring in such intertheory explanations. (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   1 citation