Conditionalization and Belief De Se

Dialectica 64 (2):247-250 (2010)
Download Edit this record How to cite View on PhilPapers
Colin Howson (1995 ) offers a counter-example to the rule of conditionalization. I will argue that the counter-example doesn't hit its target. The problem is that Howson mis-describes the total evidence the agent has. In particular, Howson overlooks how the restriction that the agent learn 'E and nothing else' interacts with the de se evidence 'I have learnt E'.
PhilPapers/Archive ID
Upload history
Archival date: 2013-06-25
View other versions
Added to PP index

Total views
371 ( #18,179 of 64,246 )

Recent downloads (6 months)
32 ( #23,296 of 64,246 )

How can I increase my downloads?

Downloads since first upload
This graph includes both downloads from PhilArchive and clicks on external links on PhilPapers.