Knowledge Attributions and Behavioral Predictions
نویسندگان
چکیده
منابع مشابه
Relativism and Knowledge Attributions
Relativism, in the sense at issue here, is a view about the meaning of knowledge attributions—statements of the form “S knows that p.” Like contextualism, it holds that the truth of knowledge claims is sensitive to contextual factors, such as which alternatives are relevant at the context, or how high the stakes are. For the relativist, however, the relevant context is the context from which th...
متن کاملFallibilism and concessive knowledge attributions
Lewis concludes that fallibilism is uncomfortable, though preferable to scepticism. However, he believes that contextualism about knowledge allows us to ‘dodge the choice’ between fallibilism and scepticism. For the contextualist semantics for ‘know’ can explain the oddity of fallibilism, without landing us into scepticism. The challenge facing the non-contextualist advocate of fallibilism is t...
متن کاملSocial Functions of Knowledge Attributions
Drawing upon work in evolutionary game theory and experimental philosophy, I argue that one of the roles the concept of knowledge plays in our social cognitive ecology is that of enabling us to make adaptively important distinctions between different kinds of blameworthy and blameless behaviors. In particular, I argue that knowledge enables us to distinguish which agents are most worthy of blam...
متن کاملPractical Interests, Relevant Alternatives, and Knowledge Attributions: an Empirical Study
In defending his interest-relative account of knowledge, Jason Stanley relies heavily on intuitions about several bank cases. We experimentally test the empirical claims that Stanley seems to make concerning our common-sense intuitions about these cases. Additionally, we test the empirical claims that Jonathan Schaffer seems to make, regarding the salience of an alternative, in his critique of ...
متن کاملNaive Attributors' Attributions and Predictions: What Is Informative and When Is an Effect an Effect?
Borgida has questioned the extent to which Wells and Harvey's data indicate that people do not ignore consensus information when making predictions and attributions. This article takes issue with Borgida's summary of parts of our work and with several of his arguments on grounds of precision and completeness. It is also noted that Kahneman and Tversky's analyses of data in their lawyer-engineer...
متن کاملذخیره 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: Cognitive Science
سال: 2016
ISSN: 0364-0213
DOI: 10.1111/cogs.12469