7 found
Sort by:
  1. Geoffrey Brennan, Lina Eriksson, Robert E. Goodin & Nicholas Southwood (2013). Explaining Norms. Oxford University Press.
    Norms are a pervasive yet mysterious feature of social life. In Explaining Norms, four philosophers and social scientists team up to grapple with some of the many mysteries, offering a comprehensive account of norms: what they are; how and why they emerge, persist and change; and how and to what extent they themselves serve to explain what we do. Norms, they argue, should be understood in non-reductive terms as clusters of normative attitudes that serve the function of making us accountable (...)
    Direct download  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  2. Lina Eriksson & Wlodek Rabinowicz (2013). The Interference Problem for the Betting Interpretation of Degrees of Belief. Synthese 190 (5):809-830.
    The paper’s target is the historically influential betting interpretation of subjective probabilities due to Ramsey and de Finetti. While there are several classical and well-known objections to this interpretation, the paper focuses on just one fundamental problem: There is a sense in which degrees of belief cannot be interpreted as betting rates. The reasons differ in different cases, but there’s one crucial feature that all these cases have in common: The agent’s degree of belief in a proposition A does not (...)
    No categories
    Direct download (9 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  3. Nicholas Southwood & Lina Eriksson (2011). Norms and Conventions. Philosophical Explorations 14 (2):195 - 217.
    What is the relation between norms (in the sense of ?socially accepted rules?) and conventions? A number of philosophers have suggested that there is some kind of conceptual or constitutive relation between them. Some hold that conventions are or entail special kinds of norms (the ?conventions-as-norms thesis?). Others hold that at least some norms are or entail special kinds of conventions (the ?norms-as-conventions thesis?). We argue that both theses are false. Norms and conventions are crucially different conceptually and functionally in (...)
    Direct download (7 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  4. Robert E. Goodin & Lina Eriksson (2009). Democratically Relevant Alternatives. Analysis 69 (1):9-17.
    Direct download (7 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  5. Lina Eriksson (2008). The Concept(s) and Controversies of Equilibrium. Biology and Philosophy 23 (3):447-454.
    Direct download (5 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  6. Lina Eriksson & Robert E. Goodin (2007). The Measuring Rod of Time: The Example of Swedish Day-Fines. Journal of Applied Philosophy 24 (2):125–136.
    Direct download (6 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  7. Lina Eriksson & Alan Hájek (2007). What Are Degrees of Belief? Studia Logica 86 (2):185-215.
    Probabilism is committed to two theses: 1) Opinion comes in degrees—call them degrees of belief, or credences. 2) The degrees of belief of a rational agent obey the probability calculus. Correspondingly, a natural way to argue for probabilism is: i) to give an account of what degrees of belief are, and then ii) to show that those things should be probabilities, on pain of irrationality. Most of the action in the literature concerns stage ii). Assuming that stage i) has been (...)
    Direct download (9 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation