On why the best should always meet

Economics and Philosophy 16 (2):287-313 (2000)
  Copy   BIBTEX

Abstract

It seems plausible, even truistic, that when an agent is faced with the choice of giving up one belief or another, the decision should be based on the relative strengths of these beliefs along some dimension of doxastic merit. This said, however, two non-trivial questions arise: (1) Which dimension? (2) How should the contraction outcome be affected by the distribution of beliefs along this dimension?

Links

PhilArchive



    Upload a copy of this work     Papers currently archived: 92,674

External links

Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server

Through your library

Similar books and articles

Changes of disjunctively closed bases.Sven Ove Hansson - 1993 - Journal of Logic, Language and Information 2 (4):255-284.
Kernel contraction.Sven Ove Hansson - 1994 - Journal of Symbolic Logic 59 (3):845-859.
A note on partial meet package contraction.Jun Li - 1998 - Journal of Logic, Language and Information 7 (2):139-142.
Resource-bounded belief revision and contraction.Mark Jago - 2006 - In P. Torroni, U. Endriss, M. Baldoni & A. Omicini (eds.), Declarative Agent Languages and Technologies III. Springer. pp. 141--154.
Theory contraction and base contraction unified.Sven Ove Hansson - 1993 - Journal of Symbolic Logic 58 (2):602-625.

Analytics

Added to PP
2009-01-28

Downloads
34 (#481,212)

6 months
13 (#218,039)

Historical graph of downloads
How can I increase my downloads?

Author's Profile

Tor Sandqvist
Royal Institute of Technology, Stockholm

Citations of this work

Blockage Contraction.Sven Ove Hansson - 2013 - Journal of Philosophical Logic 42 (2):415-442.
A Monoselective Presentation of AGM Revision.Sven Ove Hansson - 2015 - Studia Logica 103 (5):1019-1033.

View all 7 citations / Add more citations

References found in this work

No references found.

Add more references