Basic‐Know And Super‐Know.

Sometimes a proposition is 'opaque' to an agent: (s)he doesn't know it, but (s)he does know something about how coming to know it should affect his or her credence function. It is tempting to assume that a rational agent's credence function coheres in a certain way with his or her knowledge of these...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Publicado en:Philosophy & Phenomenological Research Vol. 98; no. 2; pp. 375 - 392
Autor principal: Mahtani, Anna
Formato: Artículo
Publicado: Wiley-Blackwell Mar2019
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=135497283&site=ehost-live
header:
  @attributes:
    shortDbName: hlh
    uiTerm: 135497283
    longDbName: Humanities International Complete
    uiTag: AN
  controlInfo:
    bkinfo:
    jinfo:
      jid:
        00318205
        PPO
      jtl: Philosophy & Phenomenological Research
      issn: 00318205
      maglogo: Y
    pubinfo:
      dt: Mar2019
      vid: 98
      iid: 2
      pid: 480
      pub: Wiley-Blackwell
    artinfo:
      ui:
        135497283
        10.1111/phpr.12452
      ppf: 375
      ppct: 17
      formats:
        fmt:
          – @attributes:
              type: T
          – @attributes:
              type: P
              size: 134KB
      tig:
        atl: Basic‐Know And Super‐Know.
      aug:
        au: Mahtani, Anna
        affil: London School of Economics and Political Science
      su:
        Proposition (Logic)
        Counterfactuals (Logic)
        Critical thinking
        Value proposition
        Theory of knowledge
      sug:
        subj:
          Proposition (Logic)
          Counterfactuals (Logic)
          Critical thinking
          Value proposition
          Theory of knowledge
      ab: Sometimes a proposition is 'opaque' to an agent: (s)he doesn't know it, but (s)he does know something about how coming to know it should affect his or her credence function. It is tempting to assume that a rational agent's credence function coheres in a certain way with his or her knowledge of these opaque propositions, and I call this the 'Opaque Proposition Principle'. The principle is compelling but demonstrably false. I explain this incongruity by showing that the principle is ambiguous: the term 'know' as it appears in the principle can be interpreted in two different ways, as either basic‐know or super‐know. I use this distinction to construct a plausible version of the principle, and then to similarly construct plausible versions of the Reflection Principle and the Sure‐Thing Principle.
      pubtype: Academic Journal
      doctype: Article
      src: R
    language: English
    refInfo:
    copyright:
      @attributes:
        flag: Y
      custom: Copyright of Philosophy & Phenomenological Research 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: Philosophy & Phenomenological Research
      holder: Wiley-Blackwell
      dt:
        @attributes:
          year: 2019
    holdings:
      @attributes:
        islocal: N