Results for 'Difference-making'

983 found
Order:
  1.  53
    Difference-Making Causation.Holger Andreas & Mario Günther - 2021 - Journal of Philosophy 118 (12):680-701.
    We put forth an analysis of causation. The analysis centers on the notion of a causal model that provides only partial information as to which events occur, but complete information about the dependences between the events. The basic idea is this: an event causes another just in case there is a causal model that is uninformative on both events and in which the first event makes a difference as to the occurrence of the other. We show that our analysis (...)
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   4 citations  
  2.  8
    Difference-Making Conditionals and Connexivity.Hans Rott - 2024 - Studia Logica 112 (1):405-458.
    Today there is a wealth of fascinating studies of connexive logical systems. But sometimes it looks as if connexive logic is still in search of a convincing interpretation that explains in intuitive terms _why_ the connexive principles should be valid. In this paper I argue that difference-making conditionals as presented in Rott (_Review of Symbolic Logic_ 15, 2022) offer one principled way of interpreting connexive principles. From a philosophical point of view, the idea of difference-making demands (...)
    Direct download (5 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  3. Difference-Making and Individuals' Climate-Related Obligations.Holly Lawford-Smith - 2016 - In Clare Hayward & Dominic Roser (eds.), Climate Justice in a Non-Ideal World. pp. 64-82.
    Climate change appears to be a classic aggregation problem, in which billions of individuals perform actions none of which seem to be morally wrong taken in isolation, and yet which combine to drive the global concentration of greenhouse gases (GHGs) ever higher toward environmental (and humanitarian) catastrophe. When an individual can choose between actions that will emit differing amounts of GHGs―such as to choose a vegan rather than carnivorous meal, to ride a bike to work rather than drive a car, (...)
    Direct download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   15 citations  
  4. Difference-Making, Closure and Exclusion.Brad Weslake - 2017 - In Helen Beebee, Christopher Hitchcock & Huw Price (eds.), Making a Difference. Oxford: Oxford University Press. pp. 215-231.
    Consider the following causal exclusion principle: For all distinct properties F and F* such that F* supervenes on F, F and F* do not both cause a property G. Peter Menzies and Christian List have proven that it follows from a natural conception of causation as difference-making that this exclusion principle is not generally true. Rather, it turns out that whether the principle is true is a contingent matter. In addition, they have shown that in a wide range (...)
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   10 citations  
  5. Difference-making grounds.Stephan Krämer & Stefan Roski - 2017 - Philosophical Studies 174 (5):1191-1215.
    We define a notion of difference-making for partial grounds of a fact in rough analogy to existing notions of difference-making for causes of an event. Using orthodox assumptions about ground, we show that it induces a non-trivial division with examples of partial grounds on both sides. We then demonstrate the theoretical fruitfulness of the notion by applying it to the analysis of a certain kind of putative counter-example to the transitivity of ground recently described by Jonathan (...)
    Direct download (5 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   29 citations  
  6.  29
    Difference-making conditionals and the relevant Ramsey test.Hans Rott - 2022 - Review of Symbolic Logic 15 (1):133-164.
    This article explores conditionals expressing that the antecedent makes a difference for the consequent. A ‘relevantised’ version of the Ramsey Test for conditionals is employed in the context of the classical theory of belief revision. The idea of this test is that the antecedent is relevant to the consequent in the following sense: a conditional is accepted just in case the consequent is accepted if the belief state is revised by the antecedent and the consequent fails to be accepted (...)
    Direct download (3 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   19 citations  
  7. Difference-making in context.Peter Menzies - 2004 - In J. Collins, N. Hall & L. Paul (eds.), Causation and Counterfactuals. MIT Press.
    Several different approaches to the conceptual analysis of causation are guided by the idea that a cause is something that makes a difference to its effects. These approaches seek to elucidate the concept of causation by explicating the concept of a difference-maker in terms of better-understood concepts. There is no better example of such an approach than David Lewis’ analysis of causation, in which he seeks to explain the concept of a difference-maker in counterfactual terms. Lewis introduced (...)
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   105 citations  
  8.  58
    Difference-making conditionals and the Relevant Ramsey Test.Hans Rott - 2019 - Review of Symbolic Logic:1-39.
    This paper explores conditionals expressing that the antecedent makes a difference for the consequent. A 'relevantised' version of the Ramsey Test for conditionals is employed in the context of the classical theory of belief revision. The idea of this test is that the antecedent is relevant to the consequent in the following sense: a conditional is accepted just in case (i) the consequent is accepted if the belief state is revised by the antecedent and (ii) the consequent fails to (...)
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   22 citations  
  9.  34
    Boolean Difference-Making: A Modern Regularity Theory of Causation.Christoph Falk & Michael Baumgartner - 2023 - British Journal for the Philosophy of Science 74 (1):171-197.
    A regularity theory of causation analyses type-level causation in terms of Boolean difference-making. The essential ingredient that helps this theoretical framework overcome the problems of Hume’s and Mill’s classical accounts is a principle of non-redundancy: only Boolean dependency structures from which no elements can be eliminated track causation. The first part of this article argues that the recent regularity-theoretic literature has not consistently implemented this principle, for it disregarded an important type of redundancies: structural redundancies. Moreover, it is (...)
    Direct download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   1 citation  
  10.  64
    A difference-making account of causation.Wolfgang Pietsch - unknown
    A difference-making account of causality is proposed that is based on a counterfactual definition, but differs from traditional counterfactual approaches to causation in a number of crucial respects: it introduces a notion of causal irrelevance; it evaluates the truth-value of counterfactual statements in terms of difference-making; it renders causal statements background-dependent. On the basis of the fundamental notions 'causal relevance' and 'causal irrelevance', further causal concepts are defined including causal factors, alternative causes, and importantly inus-conditions. Problems (...)
    Direct download (3 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   3 citations  
  11.  44
    Boolean Difference-Making: A Modern Regularity Theory of Causation.Michael Baumgartner & Christoph Falk - unknown - British Journal for the Philosophy of Science:axz047.
    A regularity theory of causation analyses type-level causation in terms of Boolean difference-making. The essential ingredient that helps this theoretical framework overcome the problems of Hume’s and Mill’s classical accounts is a principle of non-redundancy: only Boolean dependency structures from which no elements can be eliminated track causation. The first part of this paper argues that the recent regularity theoretic literature has not consistently implemented this principle, for it disregarded an important type of redundancies: structural redundancies. Moreover, it (...)
    Direct download (6 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   4 citations  
  12. Difference-making and deterministic chance.Harjit Bhogal - 2020 - Philosophical Studies 178 (7):2215-2235.
    Why do we value higher-level scientific explanations if, ultimately, the world is physical? An attractive answer is that physical explanations often cite facts that don’t make a difference to the event in question. I claim that to properly develop this view we need to commit to a type of deterministic chance. And in doing so, we see the theoretical utility of deterministic chance, giving us reason to accept a package of views including deterministic chance.
    Direct download (4 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  13.  89
    Difference making, explanatory relevance, and mechanistic models.Dingmar van Eck & Raoul Gervais - 2016 - Theoria: Revista de Teoría, Historia y Fundamentos de la Ciencia 31 (1):125-134.
    In this paper we consider mechanistic explanations for biologic malfunctions. Drawing on Lipton’s work on difference making, we offer three reasons why one should distinguish i) mechanistic features that only make a difference to the malfunction one aims to explain, from ii) features that make a difference to both the malfunction and normal functioning. Recognition of the distinction is important for a) repair purposes, b) mechanism discovery, and c) understanding. This analysis extends current mechanistic thinking, which (...)
    Direct download (4 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  14.  45
    Why difference-making mental causation does not save free will.Alva Stråge - 2022 - Philosophical Explorations 26 (1):30-44.
    Many philosophers take mental causation to be required for free will. But it has also been argued that the most popular view of the nature of mental states, i.e. non-reductive physicalism, excludes the existence of mental causation, due to what is known as the ‘exclusion argument’. In this paper, I discuss the difference-making account of mental causation proposed by [List, C., and Menzies, P. 2017. “My Brain Made Me Do It: The Exclusion Argument Against Free Will, and What’s (...)
    Direct download (5 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  15. DifferenceMaking in Epistemology.Juan Comesaña & Carolina Sartorio - 2012 - Noûs 48 (2):368-387.
  16.  5
    Difference-making and the control relation that grounds responsibility in hierarchical groups.Johannes Himmelreich - forthcoming - Philosophical Studies:1-28.
    Hierarchical groups shape social, political, and personal life. This paper concerns the question of how individuals within such groups can be responsible. The paper explores how individual responsibility can be partially grounded in difference-making. The paper concentrates on the control condition of responsibility and takes into view three distinct phenomena of responsibility in hierarchical groups. First, a superior can be responsible for outcomes that her subordinates bring about. Second, a subordinate can be responsible although she is unable to (...)
    No categories
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  17. Mechanistic Causation: Difference-Making is Enough.Stathis Psillos & Stavros Ioannidis - 2019 - Teorema: International Journal of Philosophy 3 (38):53-75.
    In this paper we defend the view that mechanisms are underpinned by networks of difference-making relations. First, we distinguish and criticise two different kinds of arguments in favour of an activity-based understanding of mechanism: Glennan’s metaphysics- first approach and Illari and Williamson’s science-first approach. Second, we present an alternative difference-making view of mechanism and illustrate it by looking at the history of the case of scurvy prevention. We use the case of scurvy to argue that evidence (...)
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   1 citation  
  18. Physical causation and difference-making.Alyssa Ney - 2009 - British Journal for the Philosophy of Science 60 (4):737-764.
    This paper examines the relationship between physical theories of causation and theories of difference-making. It is plausible to think that such theories are compatible with one another as they are aimed at different targets: the former, an empirical account of actual causal relations; the latter, an account that will capture the truth of most of our ordinary causal claims. The question then becomes: what is the relationship between physical causation and difference-making? Is one kind of causal (...)
    Direct download (9 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   41 citations  
  19.  72
    Mechanisms and Difference-Making.Stefan Dragulinescu - 2017 - Acta Analytica 32 (1):29-54.
    I argue that difference-making should be a crucial element for evaluating the quality of evidence for mechanisms, especially with respect to the robustness of mechanisms, and that it should take central stage when it comes to the general role played by mechanisms in establishing causal claims in medicine. The difference- making of mechanisms should provide additional compelling reasons to accept the gist of Russo-Williamson thesis and include mechanisms in the protocols for Evidence- Based Medicine, as the (...)
    Direct download (7 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   10 citations  
  20.  20
    What Differences Make a Difference?Erik Parens - 1998 - Cambridge Quarterly of Healthcare Ethics 7 (1):1-6.
    Four years ago The Hastings Center initiated a That project gave the Center staff a chance to explore one swath of the theoretical literature concerning how members of democratic regimes ought to think about and respond to the differences among themselves. Much of that literature, produced by philosophers like Charles Taylor, Martha Nussbaum, and John Kekes, is wonderfully articulate about difference in general. But it is nearly silent about how particular categories of difference actually make a difference (...)
    Direct download (7 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  21. Difference-Making and Easy Knowledge: Reply to Comesaña and Sartorio.Erik J. Wielenberg - 2015 - Logos and Episteme 6 (1):141-146.
    Juan Comesaña and Carolina Sartorio have recently proposed a diagnosis of what goes wrong in apparently illegitimate cases of ‘bootstrapping’ one’s way toexcessively easy knowledge. They argue that in such cases the bootstrapper bases at least one of her beliefs on evidence that does not evidentially support the proposition believed. I explicate the principle that underlies Comesaña and Sartorio’s diagnosis of such cases and show that their account of what goes wrong in such cases is mistaken.
    Direct download (6 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   1 citation  
  22.  21
    How differences make a difference.Christopher Cherry - 1980 - Philosophy and Phenomenological Research 41 (1/2):64-92.
    No categories
    Direct download (5 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  23. Truthmaking and difference-making.David Lewis - 2001 - Noûs 35 (4):602–615.
  24. Causation: Determination and difference-making.Boris Kment - 2010 - Noûs 44 (1):80-111.
    Much of the modern philosophy of causation has been governed by two ideas: (i) causes make their effects inevitable; (ii) a cause is something that makes a difference to whether its effect occurs. I focus on explaining the origin of idea (ii) and its connection to (i). On my view, the frequent attempts to turn (ii) into an analysis of causation are wrongheaded. Patterns of difference-making aren't what makes causal claims true. They merely provide a useful test (...)
    Direct download (4 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   12 citations  
  25.  52
    Alternative Philosophical Approaches to Causation: Beyond Difference-making and Mechanism.Yafeng Shan (ed.) - 2024 - Oxford: Oxford University Press.
    Causation is one of the most controversial topics in philosophy. There is a wide range of philosophical accounts of causation, for example, the regularity account, the probabilistic account, the counterfactual account, the interventionist account, which can be all classified as ‘difference-making’ accounts; and the mechanistic account. Many argue that only one of these accounts is correct as there is only one type of causal relation (causal monism), while others maintain that there are multiple types of causation (causal pluralism). (...)
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  26. Is Actual Difference Making Actually Different?Robert Northcott - 2009 - Journal of Philosophy 106 (11):629-633.
    This paper responds to Kenneth Waters’s account of actual difference making. Among other things, I argue that although Waters is right that researchers may sometimes be justified in focusing on genes rather than other causes of phenotypic traits, he is wrong that the apparatus of actual difference makers overcomes the traditional causal parity thesis.
    Direct download (5 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   6 citations  
  27.  33
    On the Significance of DifferenceMaking Principles.Hamid Vahid - 2015 - Metaphilosophy 46 (4-5):564-574.
    It has been claimed that difference-making plays important roles in both metaphysics and epistemology. The idea is that facts often make a difference to other facts. Thus, causes are said to make a difference to their effects, and the world is thought to make a difference to what is believed. One way to cash out this idea is in terms of the notion of counterfactual dependence between the facts in question. It has recently been objected (...)
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  28. Inefficacy, Despair, and Difference-Making: A Secular Application of Kant's Moral Argument.Andrew Chignell - 2022 - In Alessandro Pinzani & Luigi Caranti (eds.), Kant and the Problem of Morality: Rethinking the Contemporary World. London, Delhi: Routledge. pp. 47-72.
    Those of us who enjoy certain products of the global industrial economy but also believe it is wrong to consume them are often so demoralized by the apparent inefficacy of our individual, private choices that we are unable to resist. Although he was a deontologist, Kant was clearly aware of this ‘consequent-dependent’ side of our moral psychology. One version of his ‘moral proof’ is designed to respond to the threat of such demoralization in pursuit of the Highest Good. That version (...)
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  29.  42
    Relevance as difference-making: a generalized theory of relevance and its applications.Gerhard Schurz - forthcoming - Philosophical Studies:1-38.
    In this paper a generalized account of relevance as difference-making is developed. It is argued that relevance should not be considered as a particular relation, but as a (higher-order) property of instances of arbitrary relations: namely the property that variations of the relata of the relation instance make a difference for its truth. This generalized account of relevance can be fruitfully applied in many domains, such as (i) logical reasoning with applications to explanation, confirmation, verisimilitude, is-ought inference, (...)
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  30.  44
    The Space That Difference Makes: On Marginality, Social Justice and the Future of the Health Humanities.Kevin J. Gutierrez & Sayantani DasGupta - 2016 - Journal of Medical Humanities 37 (4):435-448.
    Feminist theorist and educator, bell hooks, asserts that to seek true liberation one must choose marginality. One must choose to occupy the space outside the binary between colonizer-colonized, hegemonic center-periphery, and us-them in order to create a location of possibility. This essay will reveal the practice of social justice as the navigation of the space that difference makes and argue that choosing marginality provides a framework for health humanities work towards social justice in health care. The space of the (...)
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   2 citations  
  31. Introduction: When Difference Makes a Difference.Alison Wylie - 2006 - Episteme 3 (1-2):1-7.
    Taking seriously the social dimensions of knowledge puts pressure on the assumption that epistemic agents can usefully be thought of as autonomous, interchangeable individuals, capable, insofar as they are rational and objective, of transcending the specificities of personal history, experience, and context. If this idealization is abandoned as the point of departure for epistemic inquiry, then differences among situated knowers come sharply into focus. These include differences in cognitive capacity, experience, and expertise; in access to information and the heuristics that (...)
    Direct download (12 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   5 citations  
  32. Why Making No Difference Makes No Moral Difference.Christine Tiefensee - 2018 - In Karl Marker, Annette Schmitt & Jürgen Sirsch (eds.), Demokratie und Entscheidung. Beiträge zur Analytischen Politischen Theorie. Springer. pp. 231-244.
    Ascribing moral responsibility in collective action cases is notoriously difficult. After all, if my individual actions make no difference with regard to the prevention of climate change, the alleviation of poverty, or the outcome of national elections, why ought I to stop driving, donate money, or cast my vote? Neither consequentialist nor non-consequentialist moral theories have straightforward responses ready at hand. In this contribution, I present a new suggestion which, based on thoughts about causal overdetermination along the lines of (...)
    Direct download (3 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   2 citations  
  33.  58
    The difference that difference makes: Bioethics and the challenge of "disability".Tom Koch - 2004 - Journal of Medicine and Philosophy 29 (6):697 – 716.
    Two rival paradigms permeate bioethics. One generally favors eugenics, euthanasia, assisted suicide and other methods for those with severely restricting physical and cognitive attributes. The other typically opposes these and favors instead ample support for "persons of difference" and their caring families or loved ones. In an attempt to understand the relation between these two paradigms, this article analyzes a publicly reported debate between proponents of both paradigms, bioethicist Peter Singer and lawyer Harriet McBryde Johnson. At issue, the article (...)
    Direct download (7 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   11 citations  
  34. The Difference That Difference Makes: Black Feminism and Philosophy.Donna-Dale L. Marcano - 2010 - In Maria del Guadalupe Davidson, Kathryn T. Gines & Donna-Dale L. Marcano (eds.), Convergences: Black Feminism and Continental Philosophy. Suny Press. pp. 53--65.
  35. Agency as difference-making: causal foundations of moral responsibility.Johannes Himmelreich - 2015 - Dissertation, London School of Economics and Political Science
    We are responsible for some things but not for others. In this thesis, I investigate what it takes for an entity to be responsible for something. This question has two components: agents and actions. I argue for a permissive view about agents. Entities such as groups or artificially intelligent systems may be agents in the sense required for responsibility. With respect to actions, I argue for a causal view. The relation in virtue of which agents are responsible for actions is (...)
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   4 citations  
  36.  6
    Searching Probabilistic Difference-Making within Specificity.Andreas Lüchinger - 2021 - Kriterion – Journal of Philosophy 35 (3):217-235.
    The idea that good explanations come with strong changes in probabilities has been very common. This criterion is called probabilistic difference-making. Since it is an intuitive criterion and has a long tradition in the literature on scientific explanation, it comes as a surprise that probabilistic difference-making is rarely discussed in the context of interventionist causal explanation. Specificity, proportionality, and stability are usually employed to measure explanatory power instead. This paper is a first step into the larger (...)
    No categories
    Direct download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  37. When a small difference makes a big difference: counterfactual thinking and luck.Karl Halvor Teigen - 2005 - In David R. Mandel, Denis J. Hilton & Patrizia Catellani (eds.), The Psychology of Counterfactual Thinking. Routledge.
  38.  76
    Explanation, Abstraction, and DifferenceMaking.Michael Strevens - 2019 - Philosophy and Phenomenological Research 99 (3):726-731.
    Philosophy and Phenomenological Research, Volume 99, Issue 3, Page 726-731, November 2019.
    No categories
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   1 citation  
  39. Causal foundationalism, physical causation, and difference-making.Luke Glynn - 2013 - Synthese 190 (6):1017-1037.
    An influential tradition in the philosophy of causation has it that all token causal facts are, or are reducible to, facts about difference-making. Challenges to this tradition have typically focused on pre-emption cases, in which a cause apparently fails to make a difference to its effect. However, a novel challenge to the difference-making approach has recently been issued by Alyssa Ney. Ney defends causal foundationalism, which she characterizes as the thesis that facts about difference- (...) depend upon facts about physical causation. She takes this to imply that causation is not fundamentally a matter of difference-making. In this paper, I defend the difference-making approach against Ney’s argument. I also offer some positive reasons for thinking, pace Ney, that causation is fundamentally a matter of difference-making. (shrink)
    Direct download (9 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   5 citations  
  40.  56
    Making a difference, making a statement and making conversation.Angela M. Smith - 2006 - Philosophical Books 47 (3):213-221.
    Direct download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  41. The difference difference makes : public health and the complexities of racial and ethnic differences.Ruth Groenhout - 2010 - In Jackie Leach Scully, Laurel Baldwin-Ragaven & Petya Fitzpatrick (eds.), Feminist Bioethics: At the Center, on the Margins. Johns Hopkins University Press.
  42.  14
    Interventionism, Epiphenomenalism, and Difference-Making.Max Kistler - unknown
  43.  10
    The Difference Sexual Difference Makes in Aristotle’s Corpus.Adriel M. Trott - 2023 - Polis 40 (2):339-348.
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  44.  28
    Truth, morality, and what differences make a difference.Bruce B. Suttle - 1994 - Journal of Value Inquiry 28 (3):437-442.
    Direct download (3 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  45. On how making differences makes a difference.Jeppe Sinding Jensen - 2008 - In Jonathan Z. Smith, Willi Braun & Russell T. McCutcheon (eds.), Introducing Religion: Essays in Honor of Jonathan Z. Smith. Equinox.
    No categories
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  46. EnviroGenomarkers: The Interplay Between Mechanisms and Difference Making in Establishing Causal Claims.Federica Russo & Jon Williamson - 2012 - Medicine Studies 3 (4):249-262.
    According to Russo and Williamson (Int Stud Philos Sci 21(2):157–170, 2007, Hist Philos Life Sci 33:389–396, 2011a, Philos Sci 1(1):47–69, 2011b ), in order to establish a causal claim of the form, ‘_C_ is a cause of _E_’, one typically needs evidence that there is an underlying mechanism between _C_ and _E_ as well as evidence that _C_ makes a difference to _E_. This thesis has been used to argue that hierarchies of evidence, as championed by evidence-based movements, tend (...)
    Direct download (6 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   10 citations  
  47.  42
    Mental Causation and Exclusion: Why the Difference-making Account of Causation is No Help.José Luis Bermúdez & Arnon Cahen - 2015 - Humana Mente 8 (29).
    Peter Menzies has developed a novel version of the exclusion principle that he claims to be compatible with the possibility of mental causation. Menzies proposes to frame the exclusion principle in terms of a difference-making account of causation, understood in counterfactual terms. His new exclusion principle appears in two formulations: upwards exclusion — which is the familiar case in which a realizing event causally excludes the event that it realizes — and, more interestingly, downward exclusion, in which an (...)
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   1 citation  
  48.  12
    What makes full artificial agents morally different.Erez Firt - forthcoming - AI and Society:1-10.
    In the research field of machine ethics, we commonly categorize artificial moral agents into four types, with the most advanced referred to as a full ethical agent, or sometimes a full-blown Artificial Moral Agent (AMA). This type has three main characteristics: autonomy, moral understanding and a certain level of consciousness, including intentional mental states, moral emotions such as compassion, the ability to praise and condemn, and a conscience. This paper aims to discuss various aspects of full-blown AMAs and presents the (...)
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  49.  10
    Expanding the Logic of Paradox with a Difference-Making Relevant Implication.Peter Verdée - 2019 - In Can Başkent & Thomas Macaulay Ferguson (eds.), Graham Priest on Dialetheism and Paraconsistency. Cham, Switzerland: Springer Verlag. pp. 507-533.
    In this paper, we aim to devise a logic that can deal with both the paradoxes that motivate dialetheism and the paradoxes related to the irrelevance of material implication. We propose the semantics and the sequent calculus of a relevant logic inspired by difference-making accounts of causation and arguably true to Graham Priest’s Logic of Paradox \documentclass[12pt]{minimal} \usepackage{amsmath} \usepackage{wasysym} \usepackage{amsfonts} \usepackage{amssymb} \usepackage{amsbsy} \usepackage{mathrsfs} \usepackage{upgreek} \setlength{\oddsidemargin}{-69pt} \begin{document}$$\mathbf {LP}$$\end{document}: a relevant logic that validates those and only those \documentclass[12pt]{minimal} \usepackage{amsmath} \usepackage{wasysym} (...)
    No categories
    Direct download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  50.  61
    The Aim of Justification and Epistemic Difference-Making Principles.Hamid Vahid - 2016 - Acta Analytica 31 (1):11-29.
    The idea that truth is the aim of justification is one that is often defended by theorists who uphold different views about the nature of epistemic justification. Despite its prevalence, however, it is not quite clear how one is to cash out the metaphor that justification aims at truth. Some theorists, for example, have objected that the thesis would leave no room for justified false beliefs and unjustified true beliefs. In this paper, I offer an account of what it is (...)
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
1 — 50 / 983