Recovery and epistemic residue

Two recent defences of the recovery postulate for contraction of belief sets are analyzed. It is concluded that recovery is defensible as a by-product of a formalization that is idealized in the sense of being simplified for the sake of clarity. However, recovery does not seem to be a required feature of the doxastic behaviour of ideal (perfectly rational) agents. It is reasonable to expect that there should be epistemic residues (remnants of rejected beliefs), but not that these should always suffice to recover all the original beliefs if the discarded belief is reinstated.
Keywords belief revision  epistemic residue  ideal agent  idealization  recovery  theory change
Categories (categorize this paper)
DOI 10.1023/A:1008316915066
 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
Download options
PhilPapers Archive

Upload a copy of this paper     Check publisher's policy on self-archival     Papers currently archived: 24,422
External links
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.

Add more references

Citations of this work BETA
Sven Ove Hansson (2000). Formalization in Philosophy. Bulletin of Symbolic Logic 6 (2):162-175.

Add more citations

Similar books and articles

Monthly downloads

Added to index


Total downloads

8 ( #467,641 of 1,924,875 )

Recent downloads (6 months)

1 ( #417,923 of 1,924,875 )

How can I increase my downloads?

My notes
Sign in to use this feature

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