David Bourget (Western Ontario)
David Chalmers (ANU, NYU)
Rafael De Clercq
Jack Alan Reynolds
Learn more about PhilPapers
In André Fuhrmann & Michael Morreau (eds.), The Logic of Theory Change. Springer (1991)
The so called Ramsey test is a semantic recipe for determining whether a conditional proposition is acceptable in a given state of belief. Informally, it can be formulated as follows: (RT) Accept a proposition of the form "if A, then C" in a state of belief K, if and only if the minimal change of K needed to accept A also requires accepting C. In Gärdenfors (1986) it was shown that the Ramsey test is, in the context of some other weak conditions, on pain of triviality incompatible with the following principle, which was there called the preservation criterion: (P) If a proposition B is accepted in a given state of belief K and the proposition A is consistent with the beliefs in K, then B is still accepted in the minimal change of K needed to accept A. (RT) provides a necessary and sufficient criterion for when a 'positive' conditional should be included in a belief state, but it does not say anything about when the negation of a conditional sentence should be accepted. A very natural candidate for this purpose is the following negative Ramsey test: (NRT) Accept the negation of a proposition of the form "if A, then C" in a consistent state of belief K, if and only if the minimal change of K needed to accept A does not require accepting C. This note shows that (NRT) leads to triviality results even in the absence of additional conditions like (P).
|Keywords||Ramsey test negative Ramsey test preservation Gärdenfors, Peter Ramsey, Frank|
|Categories||categorize this paper)|
Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server
Configure custom proxy (use this if your affiliation does not provide a proxy)
|Through your library|
References found in this work BETA
No references found.
Citations of this work BETA
John Cantwell (2009). Conditionals in Reasoning. Synthese 171 (1):47 - 75.
Similar books and articles
Richard Bradley (2007). A Defence of the Ramsey Test. Mind 116 (461):1-21.
Horacio L. Arlo Costa (1990). Conditionals and Monotonic Belief Revisions: The Success Postulate. Studia Logica 49 (4):557 - 566.
John Pais & Peter Jackson (1992). Partial Monotonicity and a New Version of the Ramsey Test. Studia Logica 51 (1):21 - 47.
David Barnett (2008). Ramsey + Moore ≠ God. Analysis 68 (2):168 - 174.
Charles B. Cross (1990). Belief Revision, Non-Monotonic Reasoning, and the Ramsey Test. In Kyburg Henry E., Loui Ronald P. & Carlson Greg N. (eds.), Knowledge Representation and Defeasible Reasoning. Kluwer. 223--244.
Horacio Arló Costa & Isaac Levi (1996). Two Notions of Epistemic Validity. Synthese 109 (2):217 - 262.
Peter Gärdenfors (1987). Variations on the Ramsey Test: More Triviality Results. Studia Logica 46 (4):319-325.
Sten Lindström & Wlodzimierz Rabinowicz (1992). Belief Revision, Epistemic Conditionals and the Ramsey Test. Synthese 91 (3):195 - 237.
Added to index2009-07-24
Total downloads23 ( #71,939 of 1,096,629 )
Recent downloads (6 months)1 ( #265,701 of 1,096,629 )
How can I increase my downloads?