COHERENTISM AND JUSTIFIED INCONSISTENT BELIEFS: A SOLUTION

نویسندگان

چکیده

برای دانلود باید عضویت طلایی داشته باشید

برای دانلود متن کامل این مقاله و بیش از 32 میلیون مقاله دیگر ابتدا ثبت نام کنید

اگر عضو سایت هستید لطفا وارد حساب کاربری خود شوید

منابع مشابه

Justified Beliefs by Justified Arguments

The paper addresses how the information state of an agent relates to the arguments that the agent endorses. Information states are modeled in doxastic logic and arguments by recasting abstract argumentation theory in a modal logic format. The two perspectives are combined by an application of the theory of product logics, delivering sound and complete systems in which the interaction of argumen...

متن کامل

Reasoning with Inconsistent Causal Beliefs

Causal reasoning is a critical part of everyday cognition. We ask how people reason about causes when faced with inconsistent sources of knowledge. Causal models arise from multiple sources of information regarding their constituent parameters. Knowledge sources may be inconsistent both within parameters (when one source says a variable should appear often and another says it should appear rare...

متن کامل

MINIMAL SOLUTION OF INCONSISTENT FUZZY MATRIX EQUATIONS

Fuzzy liner systems of equations, play a major role in several applications in various area such as engineering, physics and economics. In this paper, we investigate the existence of a minimal solution of inconsistent fuzzy matrix equation. Also some numerical examples are considered.  

متن کامل

A Logic for Reasoning about Justified Uncertain Beliefs

Justification logic originated from the study of the logic of proofs. However, in a more general setting, it may be regarded as a kind of explicit epistemic logic. In such logic, the reasons why a fact is believed are explicitly represented as justification terms. Traditionally, the modeling of uncertain beliefs is crucially important for epistemic reasoning. While graded modal logics interpret...

متن کامل

Coherentism and Belief Fixation

Plantinga argues that cases involving ‘fixed’ beliefs refute the coherentist thesis that a belief’s belonging to a coherent set of beliefs suffices for its having justification (warrant). According to Plantinga, a belief cannot be justified if there is a ‘lack of fit’ between it and its subject’s experiences. I defend coherentism by showing that if Plantinga means to claim that any ‘lack of fit...

متن کامل

ذخیره در منابع من


  با ذخیره ی این منبع در منابع من، دسترسی به آن را برای استفاده های بعدی آسان تر کنید

ژورنال

عنوان ژورنال: The Southern Journal of Philosophy

سال: 2012

ISSN: 0038-4283

DOI: 10.1111/j.2041-6962.2011.00090.x