|
Defeater
A defeater of a belief is evidence that this belief is false. Defeaters are of particular interest to epistemology because they affect whether a belief is justified. An important distinction is between undercutting and rebutting defeaters. Undercutting defeaters remove evidential support for a belief while rebutting defeaters provide evidential support for the opposite thesis of the belief. Defeaters play a central role in modern developments of defeasible reasoning. Types There are two types of defeaters: ''rebutting defeaters'' and ''undercutting defeaters''. Rebutting Evidence for the opposite thesis of a belief is called a rebutting defeater of this belief. For example, looking through the window and seeing that the sky is clear is evidence for the belief that it is not raining outside. Therefore, this perception is a rebutting defeater of the belief that it is raining. Undercutting Evidence that undermines the evidential support for a belief without giving support to ... [...More Info...] [...Related Items...] OR: [Wikipedia] [Google] [Baidu] |
Epistemology
Epistemology is the branch of philosophy that examines the nature, origin, and limits of knowledge. Also called "the theory of knowledge", it explores different types of knowledge, such as propositional knowledge about facts, practical knowledge in the form of skills, and knowledge by acquaintance as a familiarity through experience. Epistemologists study the concepts of belief, truth, and justification to understand the nature of knowledge. To discover how knowledge arises, they investigate sources of justification, such as perception, introspection, memory, reason, and testimony. The school of skepticism questions the human ability to attain knowledge while fallibilism says that knowledge is never certain. Empiricists hold that all knowledge comes from sense experience, whereas rationalists believe that some knowledge does not depend on it. Coherentists argue that a belief is justified if it coheres with other beliefs. Foundationalists, by contrast, maintain th ... [...More Info...] [...Related Items...] OR: [Wikipedia] [Google] [Baidu] |
Argumentation Framework
In artificial intelligence and related fields, an argumentation framework is a way to deal with contentious information and draw conclusions from it using formalized arguments. In an abstract argumentation framework, entry-level information is a set of abstract arguments that, for instance, represent data or a proposition. Conflicts between arguments are represented by a binary relation on the set of arguments. In concrete terms, you represent an argumentation framework with a directed graph such that the nodes are the arguments, and the arrows represent the attack relation. There exist some extensions of the Dung's framework, like the logic-based argumentation frameworks or the value-based argumentation frameworks. Abstract argumentation frameworks Formal framework Abstract argumentation frameworks, also called argumentation frameworks ''à la Dung'', are defined formally as a pair: * A set of abstract elements called ''arguments'', denoted A * A binary relation on A, calle ... [...More Info...] [...Related Items...] OR: [Wikipedia] [Google] [Baidu] |
Belief
A belief is a subjective Attitude (psychology), attitude that something is truth, true or a State of affairs (philosophy), state of affairs is the case. A subjective attitude is a mental state of having some Life stance, stance, take, or opinion about something. In epistemology, philosophers use the term "belief" to refer to attitudes about the world which can be either truth value, true or false. To believe something is to take it to be true; for instance, to believe that snow is white is comparable to accepting the truth of the proposition "snow is white". However, holding a belief does not require active introspection. For example, few individuals carefully consider whether or not the sun will rise tomorrow, simply assuming that it will. Moreover, beliefs need not be ''occurrent'' (e.g., a person actively thinking "snow is white"), but can instead be ''dispositional'' (e.g., a person who if asked about the color of snow would assert "snow is white"). There are various ways tha ... [...More Info...] [...Related Items...] OR: [Wikipedia] [Google] [Baidu] |
Evidence
Evidence for a proposition is what supports the proposition. It is usually understood as an indication that the proposition is truth, true. The exact definition and role of evidence vary across different fields. In epistemology, evidence is what Justification (epistemology), justifies beliefs or what makes it rational to hold a certain wikt:doxastic, doxastic attitude. For example, a perceptual experience of a tree may serve as evidence to justify the belief that there is a tree. In this role, evidence is usually understood as a private mental state. In Phenomenology (philosophy), phenomenology, evidence is limited to intuitive knowledge, often associated with the controversial assumption that it provides indubitable access to truth. In the science, scientific evidence is information gained through the scientific method that confirms or disconfirms Hypothesis#Scientific hypothesis, scientific hypotheses, acting as a neutral arbiter between competing Scientific theory, theories. Mea ... [...More Info...] [...Related Items...] OR: [Wikipedia] [Google] [Baidu] |
Justification (epistemology)
Justification (also called epistemic justification) is a property of beliefs that fulfill certain norms about what a person should believe. Epistemology, Epistemologists often identify justification as a component of knowledge distinguishing it from mere true opinion. They study the reasons why someone holds a belief. Epistemologists are concerned with various features of belief, which include the ideas of warrant (a proper justification for holding a belief), knowledge, rationality, and probability, among others. Debates surrounding epistemic justification often involve the ''structure'' of justification, including whether there are foundational justified beliefs or whether mere coherentism, coherence is sufficient for a system of beliefs to qualify as justified. Another major subject of debate is the sources of justification, which might include perception, perceptual experience (the evidence of the senses), reason, and authoritative testimony, among others. Justification and k ... [...More Info...] [...Related Items...] OR: [Wikipedia] [Google] [Baidu] |
Defeasible Reasoning
In philosophy of logic, defeasible reasoning is a kind of provisional reasoning that is rationally compelling, though not deductively valid. It usually occurs when a rule is given, but there may be specific exceptions to the rule, or subclasses that are subject to a different rule. Defeasibility is found in literatures that are concerned with argument and the process of argument, or heuristic reasoning. Defeasible reasoning is a particular kind of non-demonstrative reasoning, where the reasoning does not produce a full, complete, or final demonstration of a claim, i.e., where fallibility and corrigibility of a conclusion are acknowledged. In other words, defeasible reasoning produces a contingent statement or claim. Defeasible reasoning is also a kind of ampliative reasoning because its conclusions reach beyond the pure meanings of the premises. Defeasible reasoning finds its fullest expression in jurisprudence, ethics and moral philosophy, epistemology, pragmatics and con ... [...More Info...] [...Related Items...] OR: [Wikipedia] [Google] [Baidu] |
Syracuse University
Syracuse University (informally 'Cuse or SU) is a Private university, private research university in Syracuse, New York, United States. It was established in 1870 with roots in the Methodist Episcopal Church but has been nonsectarian since 1920. Located in the city's University Hill, Syracuse, University Hill neighborhood, east and southeast of downtown Syracuse, the large campus features an eclectic mix of architecture, ranging from nineteenth-century Romanesque Revival architecture, Romanesque Revival to contemporary buildings. Syracuse University is organized into 13 schools and colleges and is Carnegie Classification of Institutions of Higher Education, classified among "R1: Doctoral Universities – Very high research activity". Syracuse University athletic teams, the Syracuse Orange, Orange, participate in 20 intercollegiate sports. SU is a member of the Atlantic Coast Conference (ACC) for all NCAA Division I athletics, except for the College rowing (United States), men's ... [...More Info...] [...Related Items...] OR: [Wikipedia] [Google] [Baidu] |
Deductive Reasoning
Deductive reasoning is the process of drawing valid inferences. An inference is valid if its conclusion follows logically from its premises, meaning that it is impossible for the premises to be true and the conclusion to be false. For example, the inference from the premises "all men are mortal" and " Socrates is a man" to the conclusion "Socrates is mortal" is deductively valid. An argument is ''sound'' if it is valid ''and'' all its premises are true. One approach defines deduction in terms of the intentions of the author: they have to intend for the premises to offer deductive support to the conclusion. With the help of this modification, it is possible to distinguish valid from invalid deductive reasoning: it is invalid if the author's belief about the deductive support is false, but even invalid deductive reasoning is a form of deductive reasoning. Deductive logic studies under what conditions an argument is valid. According to the semantic approach, an argument is valid ... [...More Info...] [...Related Items...] OR: [Wikipedia] [Google] [Baidu] |
Inference Objection
In argumentation, an objection is a reason arguing against a premise, argument, or conclusion. Definitions of objection vary in whether an objection is always an argument (or counterargument) or may include other moves such as questioning. An objection to an objection is sometimes known as a rebuttal. An objection can be issued against an argument retroactively from the point of reference of that argument. This form of objection – invented by the presocratic philosopher Parmenides – is commonly referred to as a retroactive refutation. Inference objection An inference objection is an objection to an argument based not on any of its stated premises, but rather on the ''relationship'' between a premise (or set of premises) and main contention. For a given simple argument, if the assumption is made that its premises are correct, fault may be found in the progression from these to the conclusion of the argument. This can often take the form of an unstated co-premise, as in b ... [...More Info...] [...Related Items...] OR: [Wikipedia] [Google] [Baidu] |
