In R. Elio (ed.), Common sense, reasoning, and rationality. Vancouver Studies in Cognitive Science (Vol. 11). Oxford University Press. pp. 104-131 (2002)
Many contemporary philosophers favor coherence theories of knowledge (Bender 1989, BonJour 1985, Davidson 1986, Harman 1986, Lehrer 1990). But the nature of coherence is usually left vague, with no method provided for determining whether a belief should be accepted or rejected on the basis of its coherence or incoherence with other beliefs. Haack's (1993) explication of coherence relies largely on an analogy between epistemic justification and crossword puzzles. We show in this paper how epistemic coherence can be understood in terms of maximization of constraint satisfaction, in keeping with computational models that have had a substantial impact in cognitive science. A coherence problem can be defined in terms of a set of elements and sets of positive and negative constraints between pairs of those elements. Algorithms are available for computing coherence by determining how to accept and reject elements in a way that satisfies the most constraints. Knowledge involves at least five different kinds of coherence - explanatory, analogical, deductive, perceptual, and conceptual - each requiring different sorts of elements and constraints.
|Keywords||No keywords specified (fix it)|
|Categories||categorize this paper)|
References found in this work BETA
No references found.
Citations of this work BETA
No citations found.
Similar books and articles
Coherence, Truth, and the Development of Scientific Knowledge.Paul Thagard - 2007 - Philosophy of Science 74 (1):28-47.
Inconsistency: The Coherence Theorist's Nemesis?Mylan Engel Jr - 1991 - Grazer Philosophische Studien 40:113-130.
Why Lewis', Shogenji's and Fitelson's Notions of Coherence Cannot Be Accepted.Luca Moretti - manuscript
The Incoherence of Coherence Theories.Richard Fumerton - 1994 - Journal of Philosophical Research 19:89-102.
Formal Models of Coherence and Legal Epistemology.Amalia Amaya - 2007 - Artificial Intelligence and Law 15 (4):429-447.
Why Wasn't O.J. Convicted? Emotional Coherence in Legal Inference.Paul Thagard - 2010 - Cognition and Emotion 17 (3):361-383.
The Social Functions of Explicit Coherence Evaluation.Hugo Mercier - 2012 - Mind and Society 11 (1):81-92.
Added to index2010-12-22
Total downloads31 ( #164,722 of 2,164,542 )
Recent downloads (6 months)1 ( #347,995 of 2,164,542 )
How can I increase my downloads?