A NEW REVISABILITY PARADOX

by: Daniel Y Elstein

Pacific Philosophical Quarterly, Vol. 88, No. 3. (2007), pp. 308-318.

View FullText article

Blackwell Synergy, DOI

Reviews [Write a review of this article]

There are no reviews of this article

Find related articles from these CiteULike users

dutant

Find related articles with these CiteULike tags

epistemology, revisability_paradox

Abstract

In a recent article, Mark Colyvan has criticized Jerrold Katz's attempt to show that Quinean holism is self-refuting. Katz argued that a Quinean epistemology incorporating a principle of the universal revisability of beliefs would have to hold that that and other principles of the system were both revisable and unrevisable. Colyvan rejects Katz's argument for failing to take into account the logic of belief revision. But granting the terms of debate laid down by Colyvan, the universal revisability principle still commits Quineans to holding that one belief is both revisable and unrevisable: the belief that some beliefs are revisable.

@article{citeulike:1586785, abstract = {In a recent article, Mark Colyvan has criticized Jerrold Katz's attempt to show that Quinean holism is self-refuting. Katz argued that a Quinean epistemology incorporating a principle of the universal revisability of beliefs would have to hold that that and other principles of the system were both revisable and unrevisable. Colyvan rejects Katz's argument for failing to take into account the logic of belief revision. But granting the terms of debate laid down by Colyvan, the universal revisability principle still commits Quineans to holding that one belief is both revisable and unrevisable: the belief that some beliefs are revisable.}, author = {Elstein, Daniel Y. }, citeulike-article-id = {1586785}, doi = {10.1111/j.1468-0114.2007.00294.x}, journal = {Pacific Philosophical Quarterly}, keywords = {epistemology, revisability\_paradox}, number = {3}, pages = {308--318}, posted-at = {2007-08-23 22:29:46}, priority = {2}, title = {A NEW REVISABILITY PARADOX}, url = {http://www.blackwell-synergy.com/doi/abs/10.1111/j.1468-0114.2007.00294.x}, volume = {88}, year = {2007} }

RIS record

TY - JOUR ID - citeulike:1586785 L3 - citeulike-article-id:1586785 TI - A NEW REVISABILITY PARADOX JF - Pacific Philosophical Quarterly VL - 88 IS - 3 SP - 308 EP - 318 N2 - In a recent article, Mark Colyvan has criticized Jerrold Katz's attempt to show that Quinean holism is self-refuting. Katz argued that a Quinean epistemology incorporating a principle of the universal revisability of beliefs would have to hold that that and other principles of the system were both revisable and unrevisable. Colyvan rejects Katz's argument for failing to take into account the logic of belief revision. But granting the terms of debate laid down by Colyvan, the universal revisability principle still commits Quineans to holding that one belief is both revisable and unrevisable: the belief that some beliefs are revisable. KW - epistemology KW - revisability_paradox AU - Elstein, Daniel PY - 2007/// UR - http://www.blackwell-synergy.com/doi/abs/10.1111/j.1468-0114.2007.00294.x ER -

RIS BibTeX