Two notions of epistemic validity
Synthese 109 (2):217 - 262 (1996)
| Abstract | How to accept a conditional? F. P. Ramsey proposed the following test in (Ramsey 1990).(RT) If A, then B must be accepted with respect to the current epistemic state iff the minimal hypothetical change of it needed to accept A also requires accepting B. | |||||||||
| Keywords | No keywords specified (fix it) | |||||||||
| Categories | No categories specified (fix it) | |||||||||
| Options |
|
|||||||||
Download options| PhilPapers Archive |
Upload a copy of this paper Check publisher's policy on self-archival Papers currently archived: 5,865 |
| External links |
 |
| Through your library | Configure |
Similar books and articlesDavid Barnett (2008). Ramsey + Moore != God. Analysis 68 (2):168-174.
John N. Williams (2012). Moore-Paradoxical Belief, Conscious Belief and the Epistemic Ramsey Test. Synthese 188 (2):231-246.
Enrico Martino (2006). Fictional Propositions and the Unprovability of Consistency. Grazer Philosophische Studien 72 (1):201-210.
Horacio L. Arlo Costa (1990). Conditionals and Monotonic Belief Revisions: The Success Postulate. Studia Logica 49 (4):557 - 566.
David J. Chalmers & Alan Hájek (2007). Ramsey + Moore = God. Analysis 67 (294):170–172.
Peter Gärdenfors, Sten Lindström, Michael Morreau & Wlodek Rabinowicz (1991). The Negative Ramsey Test. In André Fuhrmann & Michael Morreau (eds.), The Logic of Theory Change. Springer.
Analytics
Monthly downloads |
Added to index2009-01-28Total downloads11 ( #100,810 of 556,837 )Recent downloads (6 months)1 ( #64,847 of 556,837 )How can I increase my downloads? |
My notes
Discussion
