Switch to: References

Citations of:

Rationality and epistemic paradox

Synthese 94 (3):377 - 408 (1993)

Add citations

You must login to add citations.
  1. God's Blindspot.Frederick Kroon - 1996 - Dialogue 35 (4):721-734.
    God, by definition, is all-powerful, all-good, all-wise, and all-knowing. Therein lies a problem for the theist, of course, for every one of these attributes has been the subject of fierce debate. In this paper I want to return to the debate by introducing a new problem for the idea that anyone could have the kind of perfect knowledge God is supposed to have. What distinguishes my problem from others is that the sort of knowledge it focuses on is self-knowledge, hence (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   1 citation  
  • Fitch’s Paradox and Probabilistic Antirealism.Igor Douven - 2007 - Studia Logica 86 (2):149-182.
    Fitch’s paradox shows, from fairly innocent-looking assumptions, that if there are any unknown truths, then there are unknowable truths. This is generally thought to deliver a blow to antirealist positions that imply that all truths are knowable. The present paper argues that a probabilistic version of antirealism escapes Fitch’s result while still offering all that antirealists should care for.
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   6 citations  
  • Higher Order Evidence.David Christensen - 2010 - Philosophy and Phenomenological Research 81 (1):185–215.
    Sometimes we get evidence of our own epistemic malfunction. This can come from finding out we’re fatigued, or have been drugged, or that other competent and well-informed thinkers disagree with our beliefs. This sort of evidence seems to seems to behave differently from ordinary evidence about the world. In particular, getting such evidence can put agents in a position where the most rational response involves violating some epistemic ideal.
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   294 citations  
  • The Suppositional Ramsey Test and Decision-Instability.Simone Duca - 2011 - Topoi (1):53-57.
    Abstract I analyse the relationship between the Ramsey Test (RT) for the acceptance of indicative conditionals and the so-called problem of decision-instability. In particular, I argue that the situations which allegedly bring about this problem are troublesome just in case the relevant conditionals are evaluated by non-suppositional versions, e.g. causal/evidential, of the test. In contrast, a suppositional RT, by highlighting the metacognitive nature of the evaluation of indicative conditionals, allows an agent to run a simulation of such evaluation, without yet (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  • Burge on Epistemic Paradox.Byeong D. Lee - 1998 - Canadian Journal of Philosophy 28 (3):337 - 348.
    In his papers ‘Semantic Paradox ’ and ‘The Liar Paradox: Tangles and Chains,’ Tyler Burge provides a hierarchical solution to the Liar paradox. And in his paper ‘Epistemic Paradox ’ Burge extends his hierarchy approach to the epistemic paradox of belief instability, which I shall explain shortly. Although Burge's views on the Liar paradox have been widely criticized, his views on the paradox of belief instability have not received notable attention. In this paper I shall argue that Burge's proposal is (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   1 citation  
  • Against an epistemic dilemma.Earl Conee - 1994 - Australasian Journal of Philosophy 72 (4):475 – 481.
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   14 citations  
  • How to (Blind)Spot the Truth: an investigation on actual epistemic value.Danilo Fraga Dantas - 2021 - Erkenntnis 88 (2):693-720.
    This paper is about the alethic aspect of epistemic rationality. The most common approaches to this aspect are either normative (what a reasoner ought to/may believe?) or evaluative (how rational is a reasoner?), where the evaluative approaches are usually comparative (one reasoner is assessed compared to another). These approaches often present problems with blindspots. For example, ought a reasoner to believe a currently true blindspot? Is she permitted to? Consequently, these approaches often fail in describing a situation of alethic maximality, (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   4 citations  
  • (1 other version)On the Supposed Dilemma of Conciliationism.Stefan Reining - 2015 - Episteme:1-24.
    My aim in this paper is to propose a way to resolve a supposed dilemma currently troubling the debate about rational belief formation in cases of peer disagreement. In section 1, I will introduce the general debate in question as well as the kind of view figuring in the supposed dilemma. In section 2, I will describe how the supposed dilemma arises. In section 3, I will consider the replies that have hitherto been offered and explain in how far these (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   1 citation  
  • Kroon on rationality and epistemic paradox.Byeong D. Lee - 1998 - Southwest Philosophy Review 14 (2):169-174.
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   1 citation  
  • The paradox of belief instability and a revision theory of belief.Byeong D. Lee - 1998 - Pacific Philosophical Quarterly 79 (4):314-328.
    The epistemic paradox of 'belief instability' has recently received notable attention from many philosophers. Understanding this paradox is very important because belief is a central notion of psychologically motivated semantic theories in philosophy, linguistics, and cognitive science, and this paradox poses serious problems for these theories. In this dissertation I criticize previous proposals and offer a new proposal, which I call a 'revision theory of belief'. ;My revision theory of belief is in many respects an application of Gupta's and Belnap's (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   5 citations  
  • (1 other version)On the supposed dilemma of conciliationism.Stefan Reining - 2016 - Episteme 13 (3):305-328.
    My aim in this paper is to propose a way to resolve a supposed dilemma currently troubling the debate about rational belief formation in cases of peer disagreement. In section 1, I will introduce the general debate in question as well as the kind of view figuring in the supposed dilemma. In section 2, I will describe how the supposed dilemma arises. In section 3, I will consider the replies that have hitherto been offered and explain in how far these (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   3 citations  
  • Epistemic dimensions of personhood.Simon Evnine - 2008 - New York: Oxford University Press.
    Simon Evnine examines various epistemic aspects of what it is to be a person. Persons are defined as finite beings that have beliefs, including second-order beliefs about their own and others' beliefs, and are agents, capable of making long-term plans. It is argued that for any being meeting these conditions, a number of epistemic consequences obtain. First, all such beings must have certain logical concepts and be able to use them in certain ways. Secondly, there are at least two principles (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   8 citations  
  • A new solution to the paradoxes of rational acceptability.Igor Douven - 2002 - British Journal for the Philosophy of Science 53 (3):391-410.
    The Lottery Paradox and the Preface Paradox both involve the thesis that high probability is sufficient for rational acceptability. The standard solution to these paradoxes denies that rational acceptability is deductively closed. This solution has a number of untoward consequences. The present paper suggests that a better solution to the paradoxes is to replace the thesis that high probability suffices for rational acceptability with a somewhat stricter thesis. This avoids the untoward consequences of the standard solution. The new solution will (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   63 citations