The Mystery of Stakes and Error in Ascriber Intuitions

In James Beebe (ed.), Advances in Experimental Epistemology. Continuum (forthcoming)
Abstract
Research in experimental epistemology has revealed a great, yet unsolved mystery: why do ordinary evaluations of knowledge ascribing sentences involving stakes and error appear to diverge so systematically from the predictions professional epistemologists make about them? Two recent solutions to this mystery by Keith DeRose (2011) and N. Ángel Pinillos (2012) argue that these differences arise due to specific problems with the designs of past experimental studies. This paper presents two new experiments to directly test these responses. Results vindicate previous findings by suggesting that (i) the solution to the mystery is not likely to be based on the empirical features these theorists identify, and (ii) that the salience of ascriber error continues to make the difference in folk ratings of third-person knowledge ascribing sentences.
Keywords No keywords specified (fix it)
Categories (categorize this paper)
Options
 Save to my reading list
Follow the author(s)
My bibliography
Export citation
Find it on Scholar
Edit this record
Mark as duplicate
Revision history Request removal from index Translate to english
 
Download options
PhilPapers Archive


Upload a copy of this paper     Check publisher's policy on self-archival     Papers currently archived: 9,357
External links
  •   Try with proxy.
  • Through your library Configure
    References found in this work BETA

    No references found.

    Citations of this work BETA
    Similar books and articles
    Peter van Inwagen (2000). Free Will Remains a Mystery. Philosophical Perspectives 14:1-20.
    Jessica Brown (2013). Experimental Philosophy, Contextualism and SSI. Philosophy and Phenomenological Research 86 (2):233-261.
    Ian James Kidd (2012). Receptivity to Mystery. European Journal for Philosophy of Religion 4 (3):51-68.
    Steven D. Boyer (2007). The Logic of Mystery. Religious Studies 43 (1):89-102.
    Richard Joyce (2011). The Error In 'The Error In The Error Theory'. Australasian Journal of Philosophy 89 (3):519-534.
    Analytics

    Monthly downloads

    Added to index

    2012-02-18

    Total downloads

    61 ( #20,721 of 1,088,784 )

    Recent downloads (6 months)

    5 ( #20,069 of 1,088,784 )

    How can I increase my downloads?

    My notes
    Sign in to use this feature


    Discussion
    Start a new thread
    Order:
    There  are no threads in this forum
    Nothing in this forum yet.