关于我们认识论自我概念的悖论:你是一个认识论的上级吗?

Pub Date : 2022-10-19 DOI:10.1163/22105700-bja10047
M. Walker
{"title":"关于我们认识论自我概念的悖论:你是一个认识论的上级吗?","authors":"M. Walker","doi":"10.1163/22105700-bja10047","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"\n I hope to show that each of 1, 2, and 3 are plausible, yet we can derive 4: \n \n 1.\n It is epistemically permissible to believe that our preferred views in multi-proposition disputes are true, or at least more likely true than not.\n \n \n 2.\n If it is epistemically permissible to believe that our preferred views in multi-proposition disputes are true, or at least more likely true than not, then it is epistemically permissible for us to believe that we are über epistemic superiors to our disagreeing colleagues in multi-proposition disputes.\n \n \n 3.\n It is not epistemically permissible to believe that we are über epistemic superiors to our disagreeing colleagues in multi-proposition disputes.\n \n \n 4.\n At least one of 1, 2, or 3, is false.\n \n","PeriodicalId":0,"journal":{"name":"","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2022-10-19","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"A Paradox About Our Epistemic Self-Conception: Are You an Über Epistemic Superior?\",\"authors\":\"M. Walker\",\"doi\":\"10.1163/22105700-bja10047\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"\\n I hope to show that each of 1, 2, and 3 are plausible, yet we can derive 4: \\n \\n 1.\\n It is epistemically permissible to believe that our preferred views in multi-proposition disputes are true, or at least more likely true than not.\\n \\n \\n 2.\\n If it is epistemically permissible to believe that our preferred views in multi-proposition disputes are true, or at least more likely true than not, then it is epistemically permissible for us to believe that we are über epistemic superiors to our disagreeing colleagues in multi-proposition disputes.\\n \\n \\n 3.\\n It is not epistemically permissible to believe that we are über epistemic superiors to our disagreeing colleagues in multi-proposition disputes.\\n \\n \\n 4.\\n At least one of 1, 2, or 3, is false.\\n \\n\",\"PeriodicalId\":0,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0,\"publicationDate\":\"2022-10-19\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1163/22105700-bja10047\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1163/22105700-bja10047","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

我希望证明1、2和3都是合理的,但我们可以推导出4:1。在认识论上,我们可以相信在多命题争论中我们偏爱的观点是正确的,或者至少更有可能是正确的。2. 如果在认识论上允许我们相信我们在多命题争论中所偏好的观点是正确的,或者至少更有可能是正确的,那么在认识论上允许我们相信我们在多命题争论中比持不同意见的同事在认识论上更胜一筹。3.在多命题争论中,认为我们在认识上优于我们持不同意见的同事,这在认识论上是不允许的。4. 1、2或3中至少有一个为假。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
A Paradox About Our Epistemic Self-Conception: Are You an Über Epistemic Superior?
I hope to show that each of 1, 2, and 3 are plausible, yet we can derive 4: 1. It is epistemically permissible to believe that our preferred views in multi-proposition disputes are true, or at least more likely true than not. 2. If it is epistemically permissible to believe that our preferred views in multi-proposition disputes are true, or at least more likely true than not, then it is epistemically permissible for us to believe that we are über epistemic superiors to our disagreeing colleagues in multi-proposition disputes. 3. It is not epistemically permissible to believe that we are über epistemic superiors to our disagreeing colleagues in multi-proposition disputes. 4. At least one of 1, 2, or 3, is false.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
×
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