Synthese 184 (1):29-48 (2012)
|Abstract||This paper describes a formal measure of epistemic justification motivated by the dual goal of cognition, which is to increase true beliefs and reduce false beliefs. From this perspective the degree of epistemic justification should not be the conditional probability of the proposition given the evidence, as it is commonly thought. It should be determined instead by the combination of the conditional probability and the prior probability. This is also true of the degree of incremental confirmation, and I argue that any measure of epistemic justification is also a measure of incremental confirmation. However, the degree of epistemic justification must meet an additional condition, and all known measures of incremental confirmation fail to meet it. I describe this additional condition as well as a measure that meets it. The paper then applies the measure to the conjunction fallacy and proposes an explanation of the fallacy|
|Keywords||No keywords specified (fix it)|
|Categories||No categories specified (fix it)|
|Through your library||Configure|
Similar books and articles
Nevin Climenhaga (forthcoming). A Problem for the Alternative Difference Measure of Confirmation. Philosophical Studies.
Jonah N. Schupbach (2012). Is the Conjunction Fallacy Tied to Probabilistic Confirmation? Synthese 184 (1):13-27.
Jeanne Peijnenburg (2012). A Case of Confusing Probability and Confirmation. Synthese 184 (1):101-107.
Gregor Betz (2012). On Degrees of Justification. Erkenntnis 77 (2):237-272.
Andrew Chignell (2007). Kant's Concepts of Justification. Noûs 41 (1):33–63.
David Atkinson (2012). Confirmation and Justification. A Commentary on Shogenji's Measure. Synthese 184 (1):49-61.
Added to index2009-01-28
Total downloads43 ( #26,710 of 556,837 )
Recent downloads (6 months)4 ( #20,489 of 556,837 )
How can I increase my downloads?