Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-gvvz8 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-23T03:59:43.407Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

ACCURACY FOR BELIEVERS

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  08 March 2017

Julia Staffel
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

In Accuracy and the Laws of Credence Richard Pettigrew assumes a particular view of belief, which states that people don't have any other doxastic states besides credences. This is in tension with the popular position that people have both credences and outright beliefs. Pettigrew claims that such a dual view of belief is incompatible with the accuracy-first approach. I argue in this paper that it is not. This is good news for Pettigrew, since it broadens the appeal of his framework.

Type
Symposium: Pettigrew's Accuracy and the Laws of Credence
Information
Episteme , Volume 14 , Issue 1 , March 2017 , pp. 39 - 48
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 2017 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

REFERENCES

Buchak, L. 2014. ‘Belief, Credence, and Norms.’ Philosophical Studies, 169: 285–311.Google Scholar
Clarke, R. 2013. ‘Belief Is Credence One (In Context).’ Philosophers' Imprint, 13: 1–18.Google Scholar
Easwaran, K. 2015. ‘Dr. Truthlove or: How I Learned to Stop Worrying and Love Bayesian Probabilities.’ Noûs, Online First.Google Scholar
Easwaran, K. and Fitelson, B. 2015. ‘Accuracy, Coherence, and Evidence.’ Oxford Studies in Epistemology, 5: 61–96.Google Scholar
Foley, R. 2009. ‘Beliefs, Degrees of Belief, and the Lockean Thesis.’ In Huber, F. and Schmidt-Petri, C. (eds), Degrees of Belief, pp. 37–48. Synthese Library 342. New York, NY: Springer.Google Scholar
Greco, D. 2015. ‘How I Learned to Stop Worrying and Love Probability 1.’ Philosophical Perspectives 29: 179–201.Google Scholar
Harman, G. 1986. Change in View. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Hawthorne, J. 2004. Knowledge and Lotteries. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Jeffrey, R. 1970. ‘Dracula meets Wolfman: Acceptance vs. Partial Belief.’ In Swain, M. (ed.), Induction, Acceptance, and Rational Belief, pp. 157–85. Dordrecht: D. Reidel.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Joyce, J. M. 1999. The Foundations of Causal Decision Theory. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Lance, M. N. 1995. ‘Subjective Probability and Acceptance.’ Philosophical Studies, 77: 147–79.Google Scholar
Leitgeb, H. 2016. The Stability of Belief. How Rational Belief Coheres with Probability. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Lin, H. 2013. ‘Foundations of Everyday Practical Reasoning,’ Journal of Philosophical Logic, 42: 831–62.Google Scholar
Lin, H. and Kelly, K. 2012. ‘Propositional Reasoning that Tracks Probabilistic Reasoning.’ Journal of Philosophical Logic, 41: 957–81.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lyon, A. 2014. ‘Resisting Doxastic Pluralism: The Bayesian Challenge Redux .’ Unpublished Manuscript .Google Scholar
Pettigrew, R. 2015. ‘Accuracy and the Credence-Belief Connection.’ Philosophers' Imprint, 15 (16).Google Scholar
Pettigrew, R. 2016. Accuracy and the Laws of Credence. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Ross, J. and Schroeder, M. 2014. ‘Belief, Credence, and Pragmatic Encroachment.’ Philosophy and Phenomenological Research, 88: 259–88.Google Scholar
Staffel, J. 2016. ‘Beliefs, Buses and Lotteries: Why Rational Belief Can't be Stably High Credence.’ Philosophical Studies, 173: 1721–34.Google Scholar
Stanley, J. 2005. Knowledge and Practical Interests, Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Sturgeon, S. 2015. ‘The Tale of Bella and Creda.’ Philosophers' Imprint, 15 (31).Google Scholar
Tang, W. H. 2015. ‘Belief and Cognitive Limitations.’ Philosophical Studies, 172: 249–60.Google Scholar
Titelbaum, M. 2013. Quitting Certainties. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Titelbaum, M. Forthcoming. ‘Normative Modeling.’ In Horvath, J. (ed.), Methods in Analytic Philosophy: A Contemporary Reader. New York, NY: Bloomsbury.Google Scholar
Weatherson, B. 2016. ‘Games, Beliefs and Credences.’ Philosophy and Phenomenological Research, 92: 209–36.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wedgwood, R. 2012. ‘Outright Belief.’ Dialectica, 66: 309–29.Google Scholar
Weisberg, J. 2013. ‘Knowledge in Action.’ Philosophers' Imprint, 13 (22).Google Scholar
Weisberg, J. Forthcoming. ‘Belief in Psyontology.’ Philosophers' Imprint.Google Scholar