Skip to main content

ETHNOS_APP

Home • Search • Journals • List 0

Knowledge and Asymmetric Loss

Bibliographic Data

ID21823152
AuthorsAlexander Dinges (0000-0002-2768-3839, Friedrich-Alexander-Universität Erlangen-Nürnberg, corresponding author)
Year2023
Volume14
Issue3
Pages1055-1076
Publication date2023-09-01
Peer ReviewedYes
Open AccessYes
TypeARTICLE
VenueReview of Philosophy and Psychology (JOURNAL)
Journal identifiersISSN: 1878-5158 • E-ISSN: 1878-5166
PublisherSpringer Science and Business Media LLC (PUBLISHER)
DOI10.1007/s13164-021-00596-9
OpenAlexW3214348875
LanguageEN
Citations received1
References cited43

This paper offers a novel account of practical factor effects on knowledge attributions that is consistent with the denial of contextualism, relativism and pragmatic encroachemt. The account goes as follows. Knowledge depends on factors like safety, reliability or probability. In many cases, it is uncertain just how safe, how reliably formed or how probable the target proposition is. This means that we have to estimate these quantities in order to form knowledge judgements. Such estimates of uncertain quantities are independently known to be affected by pragmatic factors. When overestimation is costlier than underestimation, for instance, we tend to underestimate the relevant quantity to avoid greater losses. On the suggested account, high stakes and other pragmatic factors induce such “asymmetric loss functions” on quantities like safety, reliability and probability. This skews our estimates of these quantities and thereby our judgements about knowledge. The resulting theory is an error-theory, but one that rationlizes the error in question

Attribution · Contextualism · Denial · Econometrics · Epistemology · Falsity · Metaphysics · Philosophy of language · Philosophy of mind · Philosophy of science · Proposition · Relativism · Computer Science · Epistemology, Ethics, and Metaphysics · Mathematics · Misinformation and Its Impacts · Philosophy · Psychology · Psychology of Moral and Emotional Judgment · Social Psychology

  • A puzzle about knowledge ascriptions

    Open Access•Brian Porter, Kelli Barr et al.•Noûs•2025

  • On Folk Epistemology

    Mikkel Gerken•On Folk Epistemology•2017

  • Knowledge and Lotteries

    John Hawthorne•Knowledge and lotteries•2003

  • Knowledge in an Uncertain World

    Jeremy Fantl, Morag Mcgrath et al.•Knowledge in an uncertain world•2009

  • The Oxford Handbook of Skepticism

    John Greco•The Oxford handbook of philosophy…•2008

  • Much at stake in knowledge

    Open Access•Alexander Dinges, Julia Zakkou•Mind & Language•2021

  • Dilating and contracting arbitrarily

    Open Access•David Builes, Sophie Horowitz et al.•Noûs•2022

  • Can We Do Without Pragmatic Encroachment

    Open Access•Brian Weatherson•Philosophical Perspectives•2005

  • Delimiting the Proper Scope of Epistemology

    Open Access•Rebecca Kukla•Philosophical Perspectives•2015

  • Knowledge and non-traditional factors

    Open Access•Alexander Dinges•Synthese•2021

  • Evidence, Pragmatics, and Justification

    Jeremy Fantl, Morag Mcgrath et al.•The Philosophical Review•2002

  • Solving the Skeptical Problem

    Keith Derose•The Philosophical Review•1995

  • From subjective probabilities to decision weights

    Elke U Weber•Psychological Bulletin•1994

Unique citing works1
Citations per year1
Citation span2025 - 2025 (1)
Citation velocityrecent
Highly citedNo
Citation typesNeutral: 1

Tools

Open DOIOpen Access
Ethnos_APP • Open Source Project • MIT License • Frontend v2.0.0 • Privacy and Cookies • API Documentation: api.ethnos.app/docs • API Source Code: GitHub • DOI: 10.5281/zenodo.17049435 • Frontend Source Code: GitHub • DOI: 10.5281/zenodo.17050053 • cruz.rio.br • Expectantes Misericordiae