Philosophical Error and the Economics of Belief Formation.

Recent work has demonstrated that academic research faces serious challenges. Incentives to defend publishable ideas often lead researchers astray. Despite their tendency to produce error, efforts to publish erroneous results typically help a researcher's career. In addition, errors often arise from...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Publicado en:Metaphilosophy Vol. 46; no. 4/5; pp. 638 - 657
Autor principal: Skene, Matthew
Formato: Artículo
Publicado: Wiley-Blackwell Oct2015
Materias:
Acceso en línea:Ver este registro en EBSCOhost
fields @attributes:
  recordID: 1
pdfLink:
plink: https://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=hlh&AN=110902388&site=ehost-live
header:
  @attributes:
    shortDbName: hlh
    uiTerm: 110902388
    longDbName: Humanities International Complete
    uiTag: AN
  controlInfo:
    bkinfo:
    jinfo:
      jid:
        00261068
        9OM
      jtl: Metaphilosophy
      issn: 00261068
      maglogo: Y
    pubinfo:
      dt: Oct2015
      vid: 46
      iid: 4/5
      pid: 480
      pub: Wiley-Blackwell
    artinfo:
      ui:
        110902388
        10.1111/meta.12162
      ppf: 638
      ppct: 19
      formats:
        fmt:
          – @attributes:
              type: T
          – @attributes:
              type: P
              size: 138KB
      tig:
        atl: Philosophical Error and the Economics of Belief Formation.
      aug:
        au: Skene, Matthew
        affil: Department of Philosophy, Metropolitan State University of Denver, Auraria Campus, CN 303, Denver CO, 80204, USA
      su:
        Errors
        Reasoning
        Self-defeating behavior
        Research bias
        Delusions
        University research
        Base rate fallacies
      sug:
        subj:
          Errors
          Reasoning
          Self-defeating behavior
          Research bias
          Delusions
          University research
          Base rate fallacies
      keyword:
        arguments
        bias
        irrationality
        method
        research
      ab: Recent work has demonstrated that academic research faces serious challenges. Incentives to defend publishable ideas often lead researchers astray. Despite their tendency to produce error, efforts to publish erroneous results typically help a researcher's career. In addition, errors often arise from seemingly innocent methodological assumptions that allow researchers to believe their research is sound. This article discusses this research, as well as research into difficulties facing epistemic rationality caused by nonepistemic incentives. It then applies the lessons of this research to philosophical practice. It explains why philosophy likely suffers from these problems. It then provides an example of a widely shared methodological assumption that allows such research to be pursued and regularly published. It claims that the significance philosophers place on arguments is inappropriate, and that typical evaluations of philosophical arguments involve an instance of the base-rate fallacy. It concludes by discussing whether or not this article is self-defeating.
      pubtype: Academic Journal
      doctype: Article
      src: R
    language: English
    refInfo:
    copyright:
      @attributes:
        flag: Y
      custom: Copyright of Metaphilosophy is the property of Wiley-Blackwell and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites without the copyright holder's express written permission. Additionally, content may not be used with any artificial intelligence tools or machine learning technologies. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use.
      item: Metaphilosophy
      holder: Wiley-Blackwell
      dt:
        @attributes:
          year: 2015
    holdings:
      @attributes:
        islocal: N