Pular para o conteúdo principal

ETHNOS_APP

Início • Busca • Periódicos • Lista 0

The Stability Theory of Belief

Dados Bibliográficos

ID10692682
AutoresHannes Leitgeb (0000-0002-8276-149X, Ludwig Maximilians University, autor correspondente)
Ano2014
Volume123
Fascículo2
Páginas131-171
Data de publicação2014-04-01
Peer ReviewedSim
Open AccessNão
TipoARTICLE
PeriódicoThe Philosophical Review (JOURNAL)
Identificadores do periódicoISSN: 0031-8108 • E-ISSN: 1558-1470
EditoraDuke University Press (PUBLISHER • US)
DOI10.1215/00318108-2400575
OpenAlexW2010879042
IdiomaEN
Citações recebidas70
Referências citadas27

This essay develops a joint theory of rational (all-or-nothing) belief and degrees of belief. The theory is based on three assumptions: the logical closure of rational belief; the axioms of probability for rational degrees of belief; and the so-called Lockean thesis, in which the concepts of rational belief and rational degree of belief figure simultaneously. In spite of what is commonly believed, this essay will show that this combination of principles is satisfiable (and indeed nontrivially so) and that the principles are jointly satisfied if and only if rational belief is equivalent to the assignment of a stably high rational degree of belief. Although the logical closure of belief and the Lockean thesis are attractive postulates in themselves, initially this may seem like a formal “curiosity”; however, as will be argued in the rest of the essay, a very reasonable theory of rational belief can be built around these principles that is not ad hoc and that has various philosophical features that are plausible independently. In particular, this essay shows that the theory allows for a solution to the Lottery Paradox, and it has nice applications to formal epistemology. The price that is to be paid for this theory is a strong dependency of belief on the context, where a context involves both the agent's degree of belief function and the partitioning or individuation of the underlying possibilities. But as this essay argues, that price seems to be affordable. This essay develops a joint theory of rational (all-or-nothing) belief and degrees of belief. The theory is based on three assumptions: the logical closure of rational belief; the axioms of probability for rational degrees of belief; and the so-called Lockean thesis, in which the concepts of rational belief and rational degree of belief figure simultaneously. In spite of what is commonly believed, I will show that this combination of principles is satisfiable (and indeed nontrivially so) and that the principles are jointly satisfied if and only if rational belief is equivalent to the assignment of a stably high rational degree of belief. Although the logical closure of belief and the Lockean thesis are attractive postulates in themselves, initially this may seem like a formal “curiosity”; however, as I am going to argue in the rest of the essay, a very reasonable theory of rational belief can be built around these principles that is not ad hoc but that has various philosophical features that are plausible independently

Axiom · Closure (psychology) · Context (archaeology) · Economics · Epistemology · Nothing · Rational agent · Rationality · Theory · Artificial Intelligence · Computer Science · Epistemology, Ethics, and Metaphysics · Logic, Reasoning, and Knowledge · Mathematics · Philosophy

  • Belief revision revised

    Open Access•Joshua Edward Pearson•Philosophy and Phenomenological…•2025

  • Belief is weak

    Open Access•John Hawthorne, Daniel Rothschild et al.•Philosophical Studies•2016

  • Lockeans Maximize Expected Accuracy

    Open Access•Kevin Dorst•Mind•2019

  • Frontloading, Supposition, and Contraction

    Bryan Pickel•The Philosophical Quarterly•2015

  • Hybrid Impermissivism and the Diachronic Coordination Problem

    Tamaz Tokhadze•Philosophical Topics•2021

  • Hedged testimony

    Open Access•Peter Van Elswyk•Noûs•2023

  • Body Checking in Anorexia Nervosa

    Open Access•Asbjørn Steglich-Petersen, Somogy Vargas•Review of Philosophy and Psychology•2024

  • Veritistic Teleological Epistemology, the Bad Lot, and Epistemic Risk Consistency

    Open Access•Raimund Pils•Journal for General Philosophy of…•2024

  • The Positive Argument Against Scientific Realism

    Open Access•Florian J Boge•Journal for General Philosophy of…•2023

  • How to (Blind)Spot the Truth

    Open Access•Danilo Fraga Dantas•Erkenntnis•2023

  • Belief-Credence Interaction Beyond Arbitrary Partitions

    Open Access•Tamaz Tokhadze•Erkenntnis•2026

  • The Practical Import of Higher-Order Defeat

    Open Access•Jakob Donskov, Asbjørn Steglich-Petersen•Erkenntnis•2026

  • Lockean Beliefs, Dutch Books, and Scoring Systems

    Open Access•Daniel Rothschild•Erkenntnis•2023

  • A Disjunctive Argument Against Conjoining Belief Impermissivism and Credal Impermissivism

    Open Access•Mark Satta•Erkenntnis•2024

  • A Causal Safety Criterion for Knowledge

    Open Access•Jonathan Vandenburgh•Erkenntnis•2024

  • Testimonial Reliance

    Open Access•Sanford C Goldberg•Erkenntnis•2024

  • How to Believe Long Conjunctions of Beliefs

    Open Access•Stefano Bonzio, Gustavo Cevolani et al.•Erkenntnis•2023

  • Belief

    Open Access•John Macfarlane•Erkenntnis•2025

  • Combining Probabilities with Full Beliefs

    Open Access•Sven Ove Hansson•Erkenntnis•2025

  • Resolutions Against Uniqueness

    Open Access•Kenji Lota, Ulf Hlobil•Erkenntnis•2023

  • Degrees of Doxastic Justification

    Open Access•Moritz Schulz•Erkenntnis•2022

  • Probability of Guilt

    Open Access•Mario Günther•Canadian Journal of Philosophy•2024

  • Humility and Complexity

    Open Access•Daniel Greco•Canadian Journal of Philosophy•2025

  • Guessing and Its Limits

    Open Access•Helena Fang•Philosophy and Phenomenological…•2026

  • Rational requirements for suspended judgment

    Open Access•Luis Rosa•Philosophical Studies•2021

  • Rethinking the credal basis of rational judgment and suspension

    Open Access•Berit Brogaard•Philosophical Studies•2026

  • Credence and belief

    Open Access•Ram Neta•Philosophical Studies•2023

  • Justification and gradability

    Open Access•Davide Fassio, Artūrs Logins•Philosophical Studies•2023

  • What is rational belief

    Open Access•Julien Dutant, Clayton Littlejohn•Noûs•2024

  • Suspending belief in credal accounts

    Open Access•Ángel Del Río•Noûs•2024

  • Suspending judgment the correct way

    Luis Rosa•Inquiry•2023

  • The Behavior of Information

    Open Access•Jennifer Loughmiller-Cardinal, James Scott Cardinal•Societies•2023

  • Normalcy, Understanding and the Problem of Statistical Evidence

    Open Access•Miloud Belkoniene•Theoria•2019

  • The surplus value of knowledge

    Open Access•Willfried Spohn•Theoria•2024

  • Against Deductive Closure

    Open Access•Paul D Thorn•Theoria•2017

  • Belief, Credence and Statistical Evidence

    Open Access•Davide Fassio, Jie Gao•Theoria•2020

  • The Normative Force of Logical and Probabilistic Reasoning in Improving Beliefs

    Open Access•Corina Strößner•Theoria•2019

  • A Match Made in (Rational) Heaven? How Credences Relate to Probability Beliefs

    Open Access•Roman Heil•Theoria•2026

  • The Doxastic Zoo

    Open Access•Peyton Engel, Pascal Engel•Eva Picardi on Language, Analysis…•2018

  • Probabilistic Knowledge and Cognitive Ability

    Jason Konek•The Philosophical Review•2016

  • How I Learned to Stop Worrying and Love Probability 1

    Open Access•Daniel Greco•Philosophical Perspectives•2015

  • Toward an Ethics of AI Belief

    Open Access•Winnie Ma, Vincent Valton•Philosophy & Technology•2024

  • From the Lottery Paradox to Epistemic Contrastivism

    Open Access•Gerrit Neels•Erkenntnis•2026

  • Good Guesses

    Open Access•Kevin Dorst, Matthew Mandelkern•Philosophy and Phenomenological…•2021

  • Degrees of Assertability

    Open Access•Sam Carter•Philosophy and Phenomenological…•2020

  • Permissive Situations and Direct Doxastic Control

    Open Access•Blake Roeber•Philosophy and Phenomenological…•2019

  • The epistemic and the deontic preface paradox

    Open Access•Lina Maria Lissia, Jan Sprenger•The Philosophical Quarterly•2024

  • How can representationalism accommodate degrees of belief? A dispositional representationalist proposal

    Open Access•Darrell P Rowbottom•Synthese•2021

  • Cut-off points for the rational believer

    Open Access•Lina Maria Lissia•Synthese•2022

  • The joint aggregation of beliefs and degrees of belief

    Open Access•Paul D Thorn•Synthese•2020

  • Statistical resentment, or

    Open Access•Dan Enoch, Levi Spectre•Synthese•2021

  • Rational understanding

    Open Access•Finnur Dellsén•Synthese•2021

  • Will I get a job? Contextualism, belief, and faith

    Open Access•Samuel Leben•Synthese•2021

  • Simple belief

    Open Access•John Collins•Synthese•2020

  • Belief and certainty

    Open Access•Dylan Dodd•Synthese•2017

  • Normative certitude for expressivists

    Open Access•Martin Ridge•Synthese•2020

  • The rational dimension of understanding

    Open Access•Miloud Belkoniene•Synthese•2022

  • Philosophical methods under scrutiny

    Open Access•Anna‐Maria A Eder, Anna-Maria A Eder et al.•Synthese•2020

  • Credence as doxastic tendency

    Open Access•Dominik Kauss•Synthese•2020

  • Knowledge, belief, normality, and introspection

    Open Access•D Klein, Olivier Roy et al.•Synthese•2018

  • Epistemic justification

    Open Access•Willfried Spohn•Synthese•2018

  • Rigged lotteries

    Open Access•Jonathan Wright•Synthese•2018

  • Adjectival vagueness in a Bayesian model of interpretation

    Open Access•Dragana Lassiter, Daniel Lassiter et al.•Synthese•2017

  • A Structural Justification of Probabilism

    Open Access•Hannes Leitgeb•Philosophy of Science•2021

  • Credence and belief

    Open Access•Minkyung Wang•Philosophical Studies•2025

  • Epistemology Normalized

    Jeremy Goodman, Bernhard Salow•The Philosophical Review•2023

  • Full Belief and Loose Speech

    Sarah Mo, Sarah Moss•The Philosophical Review•2019

  • How Belief-Credence Dualism Explains Away Pragmatic Encroachment

    Elizabeth G Jackson•The Philosophical Quarterly•2019

  • The relationship between belief and credence

    Open Access•Elizabeth G Jackson•Philosophy Compass•2020

  • Unsettled belief

    Open Access•Bob Beddor•The Philosophical Quarterly•2025

  • Degrees of Belief

    Open Access•Vincent F Hendricks, Dirk Dalen et al.•Degrees of Belief•2009

  • Decisions and Revisions

    Open Access•Isaac Levi•Decisions and Revisions•1984

  • Knowledge and Lotteries

    John Hawthorne•Knowledge and lotteries•2003

  • Some varieties of robustness

    Jim Woodward•Journal of Economic Methodology•2006

  • The paradox of the preface

    David Makinson, D C Makinson•Analysis•1965

  • New work for a theory of universals

    David Lewis•Australasian Journal of Philosophy•1983

  • Two modellings for theory change

    Open Access•Adam J Grove, Adam Grove•Journal of Philosophical Logic•1988

  • Elusive knowledge

    David Lewis•Australasian Journal of Philosophy•1996

  • A geo-logical solution to the lottery paradox, with applications to conditional logic

    Open Access•Hanti Lin, Kevin T Kelly•Synthese•2012

  • Laws and Their Stability

    Open Access•Marc Lange•Synthese•2005

  • Bayesian personalism, the methodology of scientific research programmes, and Duhem's problem

    Open Access•Jon Dorling•Studies in History and Philosophy…•1979

  • Pragmatics and Empiricism

    Ellery Eells, Brian Skyrms•The Philosophical Review•1988

  • Gambling with Truth

    Ronald N Giere, Isaac Levi•The Philosophical Review•1969

  • Conditionalizing on Knowledge

    T Williamson•The British Journal for the…•1998

  • Generalizing the Lottery Paradox

    Igor Douven, T Williamson•The British Journal for the…•2006

  • The alternative-outcomes effect

    Paul D Windschitl, Gary L Wells•Journal of Personality and Social…•1998

Obras citantes distintas70
Citações por ano6,36
Intervalo de citações2015 - 2026 (12)
Velocidade de citaçãocurrent
Altamente citadoNão
Tipos de citaçãoNeutras: 69
Ethnos_APP • Projeto Open Source • Licença MIT • Frontend v2.0.0 • Privacidade e Cookies • Documentação da API: api.ethnos.app/docs • Código da API: GitHub • DOI: 10.5281/zenodo.17049435 • Código do Frontend: GitHub • DOI: 10.5281/zenodo.17050053 • cruz.rio.br • Expectantes Misericordiae