Authors |
|
Abstract |
We develop an approach to the problem of de se belief usually expressed with the question, what does the shopper with the leaky sugar bag have to learn to know that s/he is the one making the mess. Where one might have thought that some special kind of “de se” belief explains the triggering of action, we maintain that this gets the order of explanation wrong. We sketch a very simple cognitive architecture that yields de se-like behavior on which the action-triggering functionality of the belief-state is what counts it as de se rather than some prior property of being “de se” explaining the triggering of action. This functionality shows that action-triggering change in belief-state also undergirds a correlative change in the objective involved in the triggered action. This model is far too simple to have any claim to showing how the de se works for humans, but it shows, by illustration, that nothing mysteriously “subjective”” need be involved in this aspect of self-conception. While our exposition is very different from those of Perry and Recanati, all three of us are developing the same kind of view.
|
Keywords | No keywords specified (fix it) |
Categories |
No categories specified (categorize this paper) |
Options |
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
Download options
References found in this work BETA
No references found.
Citations of this work BETA
No citations found.
Similar books and articles
Belief Expansion, Contextual Fit and the Reliability of Information Sources.Stephan Hartmann & L. Bovens - 2001 - In Varol Akman (ed.), Modeling and Using Context. Springer. pp. 421-424.
Infinitary Belief Revision.Dongmo Zhang & Norman Foo - 2001 - Journal of Philosophical Logic 30 (6):525-570.
Philosophical Analysis in Modeling Polarization: Notes From a Work in Progress.Patrick Grim, Aaron Bramson, Daniel J. Singer, Stephen Fisher, Carissa Flocken & William Berger - 2013 - In Paul Youngman & Mirsad Hadzikadik (eds.), Complexity and the Human Experience: Modeling Complexity in the Humanities and Social Sciences. Pan Sanford.
Quitting Certainties: A Bayesian Framework Modeling Degrees of Belief.Michael G. Titelbaum - 2012 - Oxford University Press.
Whom is the Problem of the Essential Indexical a Problem For?Isidora Stojanovic - 2001 - In P. Bouquet V. Akman (ed.), Modeling and Using Context. Springer. pp. 304--315.
The Problem of Self-Belief.William Stafford Hirstein - 1994 - Dissertation, University of California, Davis
Parainconsistency of Credibility-Based Belief States.Anna Gomolińska - 2001 - Logic and Logical Philosophy 9:183.
Irrevocable Belief Revision in Dynamic Doxastic Logic.Krister Segerberg - 1998 - Notre Dame Journal of Formal Logic 39 (3):287-306.
The Relevance of Self-Locating Beliefs.Michael G. Titelbaum - 2008 - Philosophical Review 117 (4):555-606.
Belief and its Linguistic Expression: Toward a Belief Box Account of First-Person Authority.Sanford C. Goldberg - 2002 - Philosophical Psychology 1 (1):65-76.
Simultaneous Belief Updates Via Successive Jeffrey Conditionalization.Ilho Park - 2013 - Synthese 190 (16):3511-3533.
Avoiding Omnidoxasticity in Logics of Belief: A Reply to MacPherson.Kieron O'Hara, Han Reichgelt & Nigel Shadbolt - 1995 - Notre Dame Journal of Formal Logic 36 (3):475-495.
Analytics
Added to PP index
2021-11-04
Total views
30 ( #380,845 of 2,505,154 )
Recent downloads (6 months)
10 ( #74,004 of 2,505,154 )
2021-11-04
Total views
30 ( #380,845 of 2,505,154 )
Recent downloads (6 months)
10 ( #74,004 of 2,505,154 )
How can I increase my downloads?
Downloads