Thucydides and L. Bonjour: spontaneous beliefs and the structure of justification restricted to a single source of evidence

N. Golovko, I. I. Ertel
{"title":"Thucydides and L. Bonjour: spontaneous beliefs and the structure of justification restricted to a single source of evidence","authors":"N. Golovko, I. I. Ertel","doi":"10.25205/2541-7517-2022-20-4-5-20","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The paper aims to show how in practice the requirement to maintain the coherence of the system of beliefs and the corresponding behavior of «spontaneous beliefs» within the concept of empirical knowledge by L. Bonjour can be correlated. The main example considered is P. Kosso’s arguments about the reliability of Thucydides’ «History» connected with the idea of possibility of justification restricted to a single source of evidence. As a heuristics we deal with the problem of how to establish the contextual dependence of inference and, in general, of the structure of the justification of knowledge within the given situation. First, it is possible to extend L. Bonjour’s concept with the idea of the nonmonotonic nature of justification and coherence of the original system of beliefs. Such a step, in particular, will make it possible to abandon the need for the argument «from meta-justification». Second, the interpretation of «spontaneous beliefs», their justification and facts fixing whether these beliefs violate the coherence of the original system or not, as patterns (in the sense of the fundamental concept of existence by D. Ross) makes it possible (for example, due to the exact understanding of «interpretative perspective» and «functional role» of the projection) to meaningfully interpret the «context dependence» in each particular case.","PeriodicalId":495683,"journal":{"name":"Сибирский философский журнал","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-09-09","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Сибирский философский журнал","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.25205/2541-7517-2022-20-4-5-20","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

The paper aims to show how in practice the requirement to maintain the coherence of the system of beliefs and the corresponding behavior of «spontaneous beliefs» within the concept of empirical knowledge by L. Bonjour can be correlated. The main example considered is P. Kosso’s arguments about the reliability of Thucydides’ «History» connected with the idea of possibility of justification restricted to a single source of evidence. As a heuristics we deal with the problem of how to establish the contextual dependence of inference and, in general, of the structure of the justification of knowledge within the given situation. First, it is possible to extend L. Bonjour’s concept with the idea of the nonmonotonic nature of justification and coherence of the original system of beliefs. Such a step, in particular, will make it possible to abandon the need for the argument «from meta-justification». Second, the interpretation of «spontaneous beliefs», their justification and facts fixing whether these beliefs violate the coherence of the original system or not, as patterns (in the sense of the fundamental concept of existence by D. Ross) makes it possible (for example, due to the exact understanding of «interpretative perspective» and «functional role» of the projection) to meaningfully interpret the «context dependence» in each particular case.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
修昔底德和L. Bonjour:自发的信念和被限制在单一证据来源的证明结构
本文旨在展示在实践中保持信念系统的连贯性的要求与L. Bonjour经验知识概念中“自发信念”的相应行为如何相互关联。考虑的主要例子是P. Kosso关于修昔底德的“历史”的可靠性的争论,该争论与证明的可能性仅限于单一证据来源的想法有关。作为一种启发式,我们处理的问题是如何建立推理的上下文依赖性,一般来说,在给定的情况下,知识的证明结构。首先,有可能将L. Bonjour的概念扩展为原始信仰系统的证明和一致性的非单调性。特别是,这样一个步骤将使我们有可能放弃对“来自元论证”的论证的需要。第二,对“自发信念”的解释,它们的理由和事实确定了这些信念是否违反了原始系统的连贯性,因为模式(在D. Ross的存在的基本概念的意义上)使得有可能(例如,由于对投射的“解释视角”和“功能角色”的准确理解)在每个特定情况下有意义地解释“上下文依赖”。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Laws: historical transformation, modern understanding, classification The Mental Causality Exclusion Argument and the Levels of Organization of Living Objects Establishing of Collegially Shared Power and Revolutions in Western Europe of XIX century On the way to Bensalem: origins of “New Atlantis” in Francis Bacon’s early texts Photos and simulations in urban space
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1