Bayesian sensitivity principles for evidence based knowledge

Philosophical Studies 179 (2):495-516 (2021)
  Copy   BIBTEX

Abstract

In this paper, I propose and defend a pair of necessary conditions on evidence-based knowledge which bear resemblance to the troubled sensitivity principles defended in the philosophical literature. We can think of the traditional principles as simple but inaccurate approximations of the new proposals. Insofar as the old principles are intuitive and used in scientific and philosophical contexts, but are plausibly false, there’s a real need to develop precise and correct formulations. These new renditions turned out to be more cautious, so they won’t be able to do everything the old principled promised they could. For example, they respect closure for knowledge. But these sober formulations, or something like them, might be the best that we can do with respect to sensitivity. And there’s value in understanding the limits to these types of principles.

Links

PhilArchive



    Upload a copy of this work     Papers currently archived: 91,423

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

Paraconsistent Sensitivity Analysis for Bayesian Significance Tests.Julio Michael Stern - 2004 - Lecture Notes in Artificial Intelligence 3171:134-143.
Knowing Without Evidence.Andrew Moon - 2012 - Mind 121 (482):309-331.
Cartesian Knowledge and Confirmation.Joel Pust - 2007 - Journal of Philosophy 104 (6):269-289.
Is probabilistic evidence a source of knowledge?Ori Friedman & John Turri - 2015 - Cognitive Science 39 (5):1062-1080.
Sensitivity, Safety, and Closure.Sven Bernecker - 2012 - Acta Analytica 27 (4):367-381.

Analytics

Added to PP
2021-07-26

Downloads
58 (#272,130)

6 months
11 (#226,317)

Historical graph of downloads
How can I increase my downloads?

Author's Profile

N. Ángel Pinillos
Arizona State University

Citations of this work

On Relativizing the Sensitivity Condition to Belief-Formation Methods.Bin Zhao - 2024 - American Philosophical Quarterly 61 (2):165-175.
Remarks on Ángel Pinillos’s Why We Doubt.Branden Fitelson - forthcoming - International Journal for the Study of Skepticism:1-9.

Add more citations

References found in this work

Knowledge and its limits.Timothy Williamson - 2000 - New York: Oxford University Press.
Knowledge and lotteries.John Hawthorne - 2004 - New York: Oxford University Press.
Reason, truth, and history.Hilary Putnam - 1981 - New York: Cambridge University Press.
Reason, Truth and History.Hilary Putnam - 1981 - New York: Cambridge University Press.

View all 46 references / Add more references