共查询到20条相似文献,搜索用时 109 毫秒
1.
The phenomenon of mutual support presents a specific challenge to the foundationalist epistemologist: Is it possible to model
mutual support accurately without using circles of evidential support? We argue that the appearance of loops of support arises
from a failure to distinguish different synchronic lines of evidential force. The ban on loops should be clarified to exclude
loops within any such line, and basing should be understood as taking place within lines of evidence. Uncertain propositions
involved in mutual support relations are conduits to each other of independent evidence originating ultimately in the foundations.
We examine several putative examples of benign loops of support and show that, given the distinctions noted, they can be accurately
modeled in a foundationalist fashion. We define an evidential “tangle,” a relation among three propositions that appears to
require a loop for modeling, and prove that all such tangles are trivial in a sense that precludes modeling them with an evidential
circle.
相似文献
Lydia McGrew (Corresponding author)Email: |
Timothy McGrewEmail: |
2.
Michael Cholbi 《Ethical Theory and Moral Practice》2007,10(4):323-334
Philosophers have harbored doubts about the possibility of moral expertise since Plato. I argue that irrespective of whether
moral experts exist, identifying who those experts are is insurmountable because of the credentials problem: Moral experts have no need to seek out others’ moral expertise, but moral non-experts lack sufficient knowledge to determine
whether the advice provided by a putative moral expert in response to complex moral situations is correct and hence whether
an individual is a bone fide expert. Traditional accounts of moral expertise require that moral experts give reliably correct
moral advice supported by adequate justification, an account which, I argue, is too lean in allowing for the possibility of
a moral expert who is motivationally indifferent to her own moral judgments and advice. Yet even if the proposition that a
moral expert is an individual who provides reliably correct moral advice supported by adequate justification and is necessarily motivated by that advice exhausts the necessary and sufficient conditions for moral expertise, this proposition
cannot function as an applicable criterion for non-experts to use in appraising would-be experts’ claims to expertise. The
credentials problem thus remains unanswered.
相似文献
Michael CholbiEmail: |
3.
Peter Baumann 《Erkenntnis》2008,69(2):189-200
One of the most recent trends in epistemology is contrastivism. It can be characterized as the thesis that knowledge is a
ternary relation between a subject, a proposition known and a contrast proposition. According to contrastivism, knowledge
attributions have the form “S knows that p, rather than q”. In this paper I raise several problems for contrastivism: it lacks
plausibility for many cases of knowledge, is too narrow concerning the third relatum, and overlooks a further relativity of
the knowledge relation.
相似文献
Peter BaumannEmail: |
4.
Kious BM 《Theoretical medicine and bioethics》2008,29(4):213-234
There is currently much concern over the use of pharmaceuticals and other biomedical techniques to enhance athletic performance—a
practice we might refer to as doping. Many justifications of anti-doping efforts claim that doping involves a serious moral
transgression. In this article, I review a number of arguments in support of that claim, but show that they are not conclusive,
suggesting that we do not have good reasons for thinking that doping is wrong.
相似文献
Brent M. KiousEmail: |
5.
In this introduction we discuss the motivation behind the workshop “Towards a New Epistemology of Mathematics” of which this
special issue constitutes the proceedings. We elaborate on historical and empirical aspects of the desired new epistemology,
connect it to the public image of mathematics, and give a summary and an introduction to the contributions to this issue.
相似文献
Bernd BuldtEmail: |
Benedikt L?we (Corresponding author)Email: |
Thomas MüllerEmail: |
6.
Rolf Loeber Dustin A. Pardini Alison Hipwell Magda Stouthamer-Loeber Kate Keenan Mark A. Sembower 《Journal of abnormal child psychology》2009,37(6):777-791
Relatively little is known about the factor structure of disruptive behavior among preadolescent girls. The present study
reports on exploratory and confirmatory factor analyses of disruptive girl behavior over four successive data waves as rated
by parents and teachers in a large, representative community sample of girls (N = 2,451). Five factors were identified from parent ratings (oppositional behavior/conduct problems, inattention, hyperactivity/impulsivity,
relational aggression, and callous-unemotional behaviors), and four factors were identified derived from teacher ratings (oppositional
behavior/conduct problems/callous-unemotional behaviors, inattention, hyperactivityimpulsivity, and relational aggression).
There was a high degree of consistency of items loading on equivalent factors across parent and teacher ratings. Year-to-year
stability of factors between ages five and 12 was high for parent ratings (ICC = 0.70 to 0.88), and slightly lower for teacher
ratings (ICC = 0.56 to 0.83). These findings are discussed in terms of possible adjustment to the criteria for children's
disruptive behavior disorders found in the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual for Mental Disorders.
相似文献
Rolf Loeber (Corresponding author)Email: |
Dustin A. PardiniEmail: |
Alison HipwellEmail: |
Magda Stouthamer-LoeberEmail: |
Kate KeenanEmail: |
Mark A. SembowerEmail: |
7.
Laurence Goldstein 《Philosophical Studies》2009,144(3):377-389
Consideration of a paradox originally discovered by John Buridan provides a springboard for a general solution to paradoxes
within the Liar family. The solution rests on a philosophical defence of truth-value-gaps and is consistent (non-dialetheist),
avoids ‘revenge’ problems, imports no ad hoc assumptions, is not applicable to only a proper subset of the semantic paradoxes
and implies no restriction of the expressive capacities of language.
相似文献
Laurence GoldsteinEmail: |
8.
Simon Robertson 《Ethical Theory and Moral Practice》2008,11(3):263-277
A common view of the relation between oughts and reasons is that you ought to do something if and only if that is what you
have most reason to do. One challenge to this comes from what Jonathan Dancy calls ‘enticing reasons.’ Dancy argues that enticing
reasons never contribute to oughts and that it is false that if the only reasons in play are enticing reasons then you ought
to do what you have most reason to do. After explaining how enticing reasons supposedly work and why accepting them may appear
attractive, I firstly show why we are not committed to accepting them into our conceptual framework and then argue that no
reasons work in the way enticing reasons are claimed to. Thus we should reject the category of enticing reasons entirely.
相似文献
Simon RobertsonEmail: |
9.
Andrew Reisner 《Philosophical Studies》2009,145(2):257-272
In this paper I argue against the stronger of the two views concerning the right and wrong kind of reasons for belief, i.e.
the view that the only genuine normative reasons for belief are evidential. The project in this paper is primarily negative,
but with an ultimately positive aim. That aim is to leave room for the possibility that there are genuine pragmatic reasons
for belief. Work is required to make room for this view, because evidentialism of a strict variety remains the default view
in much of the debate concerning normative reasons for belief. Strict versions of evidentialism are inconsistent with the
view that there are genuine pragmatic reasons for belief.
相似文献
Andrew ReisnerEmail: |
10.
Jessica Brown 《Philosophical Studies》2009,143(3):397-405
In my remarks, I discuss Sosa's attempt to deal with the sceptical threat posed by dreaming. Sosa explores two replies to
the problem of dreaming scepticism. First, he argues that, on the imagination model of dreaming, dreaming does not threaten
the safety of our beliefs. Second, he argues that knowledge does not require safety, but a weaker condition which is not threatened
by dreaming skepticism. I raise questions about both elements of his reply.
相似文献
Jessica BrownEmail: |
11.
Vaughn E. Huckfeldt 《Philosophia》2007,35(1):23-41
The dispute between Kantians and Humeans over whether practical reason can justify moral reasons for all agents is often characterized
as a debate over whether reasons are hypothetical or categorical. Instead, this debate must be understood in terms of the
distinction between agent-neutral and agent-relative reasons. This paper considers Alan Gewirth’s Reason and Morality as a
case study of a Kantian justification of morality focused on deriving categorical reasons from hypothetical reasons. The case
study demonstrates first, the possibility of categorical agent-relative reasons, and second, that inattention to this possibility
has caused considerable confusion in the debate between Kantians and Humeans.
相似文献
Vaughn E. HuckfeldtEmail: |
12.
Dr. med. Dipl.-Soz. Alf Gerlach 《Forum der Psychoanalyse》2004,20(1):7-12
13.
Jay Newhard 《Philosophical Studies》2009,142(3):345-352
Contextual theories of truth are motivated primarily by the resolution they provide to paradoxical reasoning about truth.
The principal argument for contextual theories of truth relies on a key intuition about the truth value of the proposition
expressed by a particular utterance made during paradoxical reasoning, which Anil Gupta calls “the Chrysippus intuition.”
In this paper, I argue that the principal argument for contextual theories of truth is circular, and that the Chrysippus intuition
is false. I conclude that the philosophical motivation for contextual theories of truth fails.
相似文献
Jay NewhardEmail: |
14.
Andrew Mason 《Res Publica》2009,15(2):179-194
Some moral theorists defend a holistic account of practical reasons and deny that the possibility of moral thought depends
upon the existence of moral principles. This article explores the implications of this position for theorising about justice,
which has often aspired to provide us with an ordered list of principles to govern our institutions and practices.
相似文献
Andrew MasonEmail: |
15.
In this paper we discuss visualizations in mathematics from a historical and didactical perspective. We consider historical
debates from the 17th and 19th centuries regarding the role of intuition and visualizations in mathematics. We also consider
the problem of what a visualization in mathematical learning can achieve. In an empirical study we investigate what mathematical
conclusions university students made on the basis of a visualization. We emphasize that a visualization in mathematics should
always be considered in its proper context.
相似文献
Kajsa Br?ting (Corresponding author)Email: |
Johanna PejlareEmail: |
16.
17.
David A. Lishner Luis V. Oceja E. L. Stocks Kirstin Zaspel 《Motivation and emotion》2008,32(4):270-277
Three experiments tested the hypothesis that empathic concern for adults in need is enhanced by the degree of target infant-like
characteristics. Participants reported feeling more empathic concern for an adult target with a more infant-like face than
for an adult with a more adult-like face in a Spanish sample (Experiment 1) and in an American sample (Experiment 2). A similar
effect was found when participants were presented with either an adult with a more infant-like voice or an adult with a more
adult-like voice in a second American sample (Experiment 3). Additional analyses suggest that the infant-like characteristic
effect on empathic concern is not mediated by observer perceptions of target attractiveness, target age or youthfulness, target
vulnerability, or observer similarity to the target. These results support the proposition that infant-like cues enhance empathic
concern in human observers and that the phenomenon generalizes across stimulus modality, gender, and nationality.
相似文献
E. L. StocksEmail: |
18.
Michael Drieschner 《Journal for General Philosophy of Science》2008,39(1):1-16
19.
Ishtiyaque Haji 《Ethical Theory and Moral Practice》2009,12(2):169-179
Practical reasons, roughly, are reasons to have our desires and goals, and to do what might secure these goals. I argue for
the view that lack of freedom to do otherwise undermines the truth of judgments of practical reason. Thus, assuming that determinism
expunges alternative possibilities, determinism undercuts the truth of such judgments. I propose, in addition, that if practical
reason is associated with various values in a specified way, then determinism precludes such values owing to determinism's
imperiling practical reason.
相似文献
Ishtiyaque HajiEmail: |
20.
Timo Kajamies 《Philosophia》2009,37(3):525-534
In his topical article, Andrew Cling claims that the best extant formulation of the so-called epistemic regress problem rests
on five assumptions that are too strong. Cling offers an improved version that rests on a different set of three core epistemic
assumptions, each of which he argues for. Despite of owing a great deal to Cling’s ideas, I argue that the epistemic regress
problem surfaces from more fundamental assumptions than those offered by Cling. There are ultimately two core assumptions—in
fact two contradictory strands within the concept of epistemic support—which jointly create a powerful challenge for our pursuit
of paramount epistemic values.
相似文献
Timo KajamiesEmail: |