Epistemic Consequentialism
Bibliographic Data
| ID | 10696792 |
|---|---|
| Authors | Kevin Dorst (0000-0003-3982-3242, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, corresponding author) |
| Year | 2020 |
| Volume | 129 |
| Issue | 3 |
| Pages | 484-489 |
| Publication date | 2020-07-01 |
| Open Access | No |
| Type | ARTICLE |
| Venue | The Philosophical Review (JOURNAL) |
| Journal identifiers | ISSN: 0031-8108 • E-ISSN: 1558-1470 |
| Publisher | Duke University Press (PUBLISHER • US) |
| DOI | 10.1215/00318108-8311473 |
| OpenAlex | W4244507488 |
| Language | EN |
| Citations received | 1 |
| References cited | 13 |
Book Review| July 01 2020 Epistemic Consequentialism Ahlstrom-Vij, Kristoffer and Dunn, Jeffrey, eds., Epistemic Consequentialism. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2018. vii + 335 pp. Kevin Dorst Kevin Dorst Massachusetts Institute of Technology Search for other works by this author on: This Site Google The Philosophical Review (2020) 129 (3): 484–489. https://doi.org/10.1215/00318108-8311473 Cite Icon Cite Share Icon Share Facebook Twitter Email Permissions Search Site Citation Kevin Dorst; Epistemic Consequentialism. The Philosophical Review 1 July 2020; 129 (3): 484–489. doi: https://doi.org/10.1215/00318108-8311473 Download citation file: Zotero Reference Manager EasyBib Bookends Mendeley Papers EndNote RefWorks BibTex toolbar search Search nav search search input Search input auto suggest search filter Books & JournalsAll JournalsThe Philosophical Review Search Advanced Search Epistemic consequentialism is the view that (at least some) features of epistemic rationality can be explained in terms of features of epistemic value. The standard framework is decision-theoretic: consider an agent who has a menu of doxastic options (credal-states, belief-states, or plans to update them) and a purely epistemic utility function (standardly, a measure of accuracy). What option should they choose to optimally promote epistemic utility?Epistemic consequentialism is a hot topic, for it offers a rare combination of (1) a fruitful, tractable framework that (appears to) provide insight into both old and new questions; and (2) apparently devastating problems that (threaten to) undermine any such insight. This combination has sustained a breakneck literature, with sympathizers claiming ever more insights, objectors claiming ever more problems, sympathizers offering ever more sophisticated responses to those problems, and so on.On the side of the sympathizers, we... © 2020 by Cornell University2020 You do not currently have access to this content
Citation · Consequentialism · Epistemology · Icon · Library science · Computer Science · Epistemology, Ethics, and Metaphysics · Free Will and Agency · Philosophy · Philosophy and Theoretical Science
| Citations per year | 0.06 |
|---|---|
| Citation span | 2008 - 2008 (1) |
| Highly cited | No |