Revising Probabilities and Full Beliefs

Journal of Philosophical Logic - A new formal model of belief dynamics is proposed, in which the epistemic agent has both probabilistic beliefs and full beliefs. The agent has full belief in a...     

On Revising Fuzzy Belief Bases

We look at the problem of revising fuzzy belief bases, i.e., belief base revision in which both formulas in the base as well as revision-input formulas can come attached with varying degrees. Working within a very general framework for fuzzy logic which is able to capture certain types of uncertainty calculi as well as truth-functional fuzzy logics, we show how the idea of rational change from “crisp” base revision, as embodied by the idea of partial meet (base) revision, can be faithfully extended to revising fuzzy belief bases. We present and axiomatise an operation of partial meet fuzzy base revision and illustrate how the operation works in several important special instances of the framework. We also axiomatise the related operation of partial meet fuzzy base contraction.This paper is an extended version of a paper presented at the Nineteenth Conference on Uncertainty in Arti.cial Intelligence (UAI’03).     

Revising Beliefs Towards the Truth

Belief revision (BR) and truthlikeness (TL) emerged independently as two research programmes in formal methodology in the 1970s. A natural way of connecting BR and TL is to ask under what conditions the revision of a belief system by new input information leads the system towards the truth. It turns out that, for the AGM model of belief revision, the only safe case is the expansion of true beliefs by true input, but this is not very interesting or realistic as a model of theory change in science. The new accounts of non-prioritized belief revision do not seem more promising in this respect, and the alternative BR account of updating by imaging leads to other problems. Still, positive results about increasing truthlikeness by belief revision may be sought by restricting attention to special kinds of theories. Another approach is to link truthlikeness to epistemic matters by an estimation function which calculates expected degrees of truthlikeness relative to evidence. Then we can study how the expected truthlikeness of a theory changes when probabilities are revised by conditionalization or imaging. Again, we can ask under what conditions such changes lead our best theories towards the truth.     

Composing and Revising a Counselor's Narrative

In exploring his narrative as counselor, this author was led to new growth and insights. Defining the counselor's narrative may be an important supplement to client narrative therapy.     

Revising Test Items to Increase Validity

Eight female interviewers varied their interview styles in interviewing 207 adults who had been involved in automobile accidents during a four-year period. A “professional” and a rapport or “interpersonal” style was used. Dependent variables consisted of reporting of events related to an automobile accident in which the respondent was the driver, and for which independent criterion data were available. In addition, the amount of health information reported was also analyzed. In spite of the respondents' more favorable attitudes towards the interpersonal interviews, accuracy was not significantly greater in these rapport interviews. In fact, significant interaction effects between interviewer style and recency of the accident were obtained. Respondents, however, reported more completely under rapport conditions. The results are interpreted within a cognitive, role-learning framework.     

Revising the Logic of Logical Revision

Philosophical Studies -     

From Friendship to Marriage: Revising Kant

This paper examines Kant's accounts of friendship and marriage, and argues for what can be called an ideal of "moral marriage" based on Kant's notion of moral friendship. After explaining why Kant values friendship so highly, it gives an account of the ways in which marriage falls far short, according to Kant, of what friendship has to offer. The paper then argues that many of Kant's reasons for finding marriage morally impoverished compared with friendship are wrong-headed. The paper further argues that a few of Kant's views about friendship are false. The main point is that, when we slightly revise Kant's account of friendship and jettison Kant's misguided notions about marriage, we see that marriages can aspire to much of the same moral richness as friendships. Finally, the paper argues that this friendship model of marriage does not obscure the important ways in which marriages and friendships differ.     

Revising,Correcting, and Transferring Genes

Abstract

The distinction between germline and somatic gene editing is fundamental to the ethics of human gene editing. Multiple conferences of scientists, ethicists, and policymakers, and multiple professional bodies, have called for moratoria on germline gene editing, and editing of human germline cells is considered to be an ethical “red line” that either never should be crossed, or should only be crossed with great caution and care. However, as research on germline gene editing has progressed, it has become clear that not all germline interventions are alike, and that these differences make a significant moral difference, when it comes to ethical questions about research, regulation, clinical application, and medical justification. In this paper, I argue that, rather than lumping all germline interventions together, we should distinguish between revising, correcting, and transferring genes, and I assess the consequences of this move for the ethics of gene editing.     

Revising the Competitiveness Index using factor analysis

The Competitiveness Index is a 20-item true-false measure designed to assess the desire to win in interpersonal situations. To develop a more psychometrically sound form of the scale, 213 undergraduates were administered the original form and a modified version containing a 5-point Likert-type scale. An initial principal component analysis using a varimax rotation of the modified version yielded a four-factor solution accounting for 54.5% of the explained variance. Based on a subsequent reliability analysis. six items were dropped from the modified scale. A second analysis produced a two-factor solution accounting for 54.1% of the explained variance. Both factors (Enjoyment of Competition and Contentiousness) formed reliable subscales. The 14-item Revised Competitiveness Index had high internal consistency and was positively correlated with the original Competitiveness Index, the competitiveness subscales of the Work and Family Orientation Questionnaire, the Sports Orientation Questionnaire, and the Nach Naff measure of Need for Achievement.     

Revising the history of Cold War research ethics

President Clinton's charge to the Advisory Committee on Human Radiation Experiments included the identification of ethical and legal standards for evaluating government-sponsored radiation experiments conducted during the Cold War. In this paper, we review the traditional account of the history of American research ethics, and then highlight and explain the significance of a number of the Committee's historical findings as they relate to this account. These findings include both the national defense establishment's struggles with legal and insurance issues concerning human experiments, and the medical profession's perspective on human experimentation in the years following the Nuremberg Medical Trials. We conclude that the Committee's work both enriches the traditional view of the history of research ethics and opens important new areas for study.     

A Practical Approach to Revising Prioritized Knowledge Bases

This paper investigates simple syntactic methods for revising prioritized belief bases, that are semantically meaningful in the frameworks of possibility theory and of Spohn's ordinal conditional functions. Here, revising prioritized belief bases amounts to conditioning a distribution function on interpretations. The input information leading to the revision of a knowledge base can be sure or uncertain. Different types of scales for priorities are allowed: finite vs. infinite, numerical vs. ordinal. Syntactic revision is envisaged here as a process which transforms a prioritized belief bases into a new prioritized belief base, and thus allows a subsequent iteration.