18 found
Order:
See also
  1. Belief, Correctness and Normativity.Davide Fassio - 2011 - Logique Et Analyse 54 (216):471.
    ABSTRACT A belief is correct if and only if the believed proposition is true. Some philosophers argued that from this standard of correctness it is possible to derive the statement of a norm, a claim about what a subject ought to do. Many formulations of the standard in terms of an ‘ought’-claim have been suggested, but all resulted affected by some problem. My aim in this article is to suggest a new formulation of the standard in ‘ought’-terms based on an (...)
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   14 citations  
  2.  5
    A Problem for Deontic Doxastic Constitutivism.Davide Fassio - 2016 - Philosophical Papers 45 (3):343-364.
    Deontic Doxastic Constitutivism is the view that beliefs are constitutively governed by deontic norms. This roughly means that a full account and understanding of the nature of these mental attitudes cannot be reached unless one appeals to some norm of this type. My aim in this article is to provide an objection to such a conception of the normativity of belief. I argue that if some deontic norm is constitutive of belief, then the addressees of such a norm are committed (...)
    Direct download (3 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   1 citation  
  3.  76
    Revisionary Epistemology.Davide Fassio & Robin McKenna - 2015 - Inquiry : An Interdisciplinary Journal of Philosophy 58 (7-8):755-779.
    What is knowledge? What should knowledge be like? Call an epistemological project that sets out to answer the first question ‘descriptive’ and a project that sets out to answer the second question ‘normative’. If the answers to these two questions don’t coincide—if what knowledge should be like differs from what knowledge is like—there is room for a third project we call ‘revisionary’. A revisionary project starts by arguing that what knowledge should be differs from what knowledge is. It then proposes (...)
    Direct download (5 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  4. Why Knowledge Should Not Be Typed: An Argument Against the Type Solution to the Knowability Paradox.Massimiliano Carrara & Davide Fassio - 2011 - Theoria 77 (2):180-193.
    The Knowability Paradox is a logical argument to the effect that, if there are truths not actually known, then there are unknowable truths. Recently, Alexander Paseau and Bernard Linsky have independently suggested a possible way to counter this argument by typing knowledge. In this article, we argue against their proposal that if one abstracts from other possible independent considerations supporting reasons for typing knowledge and considers the motivation for a type-theoretic approach with respect to the Knowability Paradox alone, there is (...)
    Direct download (5 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  5.  20
    Introduction.Julien Dutant, Davide Fassio & Anne Meylan - 2017 - Synthese 194 (5):1427-1431.
    No categories
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  6.  10
    Belief, Correctness and Constitutivity.Davide Fassio - 2017 - European Journal of Philosophy 25 (4):1084-1106.
    Some philosophers have argued that a standard of correctness is constitutive of the concept or the essence of belief. By this claim they mean, roughly, that a mental state is a belief partially in virtue of being correct if and only if its content is true. In this paper I provide a new argument in support of the constitutivity of the correctness standard for belief. I first argue that the standard expresses a conceptual necessity. Then I argue that, since conceptual (...)
    No categories
    Direct download (4 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  7.  35
    Belief, Aim Of.Davide Fassio - 2015 - Internet Encyclopedia of Philosophy.
  8.  19
    Is There an Epistemic Norm of Practical Reasoning?Davide Fassio - 2017 - Philosophical Studies 174 (9):2137-2166.
    A recent view in contemporary epistemology holds that practical reasoning is governed by an epistemic norm. Evidence for the existence of this norm is provided by the ways in which we assess our actions and reasoning on the basis of whether certain epistemic conditions are satisfied. Philosophers disagree on what this norm is—whether it is knowledge, justified belief or something else. Nobody however challenges the claim that practical reasoning is governed by such a norm. I argue that assuming the existence (...)
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  9.  18
    Knowledge and the Importance of Being Right.Davide Fassio - 2015 - Logos and Episteme 6 (3):265-289.
    Some philosophers have recently argued that whether a true belief amounts to knowledge in a specific circumstance depends on features of the subject’s practical situation that are unrelated to the truth of the subject’s belief, such as the costs for the subject of being wrong about whether the believed proposition is true. One of the best-known arguments used to support this view is that it best explains a number of paradigmatic cases, such as the well-known Bank Case, in which a (...)
    Direct download (3 more)  
    Translate
     
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  10.  19
    Belief and Correctness.Davide Fassio - 2012 - Dissertation,
    The overall objective of this dissertation is to provide an analysis of the standard of correctness of belief. According to this standard, a belief is correct if and only if the believed proposition is true. My analysis consists in the investigation of a set of aspects and properties of the correctness standard of belief. The main point argued in this dissertation is that the correctness standard of belief is a standard of conformity to the satisfaction conditions of a representational function (...)
    Direct download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  11.  34
    A Blind-Spot Argument Against Dispositionalist Accounts of Belief.Davide Fassio - 2014 - Acta Analytica 29 (1):71-81.
    Dispositionalist accounts of belief define beliefs in terms of specific sets of dispositions. In this article, I provide a blind-spot argument against these accounts. The core idea of the argument is that beliefs having the form [p and it is not manifestly believed that p] cannot be manifestly believed. This means that one cannot manifest such beliefs in one’s assertions, conscious thoughts, actions, behaviours, or any other type of activity. However, if beliefs are sets of dispositions, they must be manifestable (...)
    Direct download (5 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  12.  23
    The Knowability Paradox, Perfectibility of Science and Reductionism.Massimiliano Carrara & Davide Fassio - unknown
    A logical argument known as Fitch’s Paradox of Knowability, starting from the assumption that every truth is knowable, leads to the consequence that every truth is also actually known. Then, given the ordinary fact that some true propositions are not actually known, it concludes, by modus tollens, that there are unknowable truths. The main literature on the topic has been focusing on the threat the argument poses to the so called semantic anti-realist theories, which aim to epistemically characterize the notion (...)
    Direct download (3 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  13.  16
    Logically Unknowable Propositions: A Criticism to Tennant's Three-Partition of Anti-Cartesian Propositions.Massimiliano Carrara & Davide Fassio - 2009 - In P. Hanna (ed.), An Anthology of Philosophical Studies, Vol.2. Atiner. pp. 181-194.
    The Knowability Paradox is a logical argument that, starting from the plainly innocent assumption that every true proposition is knowable, reaches the strong conclusion that every true proposition is known; i.e. if there are unknown truths, there are unknowable truths. The paradox has been considered a problem for every theory assuming the Knowability Principle, according to which all truths are knowable and, in particular, for semantic anti-realist theories. A well known criticism to the Knowability Paradox is the so called restriction (...)
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  14.  18
    Perfected Science and the Knowability Paradox.Massimiliano Carrara & Davide Fassio - 2010 - In M. M. D’Agostino, G. Giorello, F. Laudisa, T. Pievani & C. Sinigaglia (eds.), New Essays in Logic and Philosophy of Science. London College Publications.
    In "The Limits of Science" N. Rescher introduces a logical argument known as the Knowability Paradox, according to which, if every true proposition is knowable, then every true proposition is known, i.e. if there are unknown truths, there are unknowable truths. Rescher argues that the Knowability Paradox, giving evidence to a limit of our knowledge (the existence of unknowable truths) could be used for arguing against perfected science. In this article we present two criticisms against Rescher's argument.
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  15.  40
    Reductionism and Perfectibility of Science.Massimiliano Carrara & Davide Fassio - manuscript
    Nicholas Rescher, in The Limits of Science (1984), argued that: «perfected science is a mirage; complete knowledge a chimera» . He reached the above conclusion from a logical argument known as Fitch’s Paradox of Knowability. The argument, starting from the assumption that every truth is knowable, proves that every truth is also actually known and, given that some true propositions are not actually known, it concludes, by modus tollens, that there are unknowable truths. Prima facie, this argument seems to seriously (...)
    Direct download (3 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  16.  12
    La Conoscibilità E I Suoi Limiti.Davide Fassio - unknown
    The thesis includes six essays, each corresponding to a chapter, which have the target of widening the discussion on the limits of knowability through the consideration of some general problematics and the discussion of specific topics. The work is composed of two parts, each of three chapters. In the first part, the discussion is focused on a perspective proper of the philosophy of language. In particular, I consider the discussion on the limits of knowability from the point of view of (...)
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  17.  1
    Commonality Reconsidered: On the Common Source of Epistemic Standards.Davide Fassio - 2016 - In Pedro Schmechtig & Martin Grajner (eds.), Epistemic Reasons, Norms and Goals. De Gruyter. pp. 165-184.
    Direct download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  18.  83
    Liber Amicorum Pascal Engel.Julien Dutant, Davide Fassio & Anne Meylan (eds.) - 2014 - University of Geneva.