Coherence in Epistemology and Belief Revision*

Abstract A general theory of coherence is proposed, in which systemic and relational coherence are shown to be interdefinable. When this theory is applied to sets of sentences, it turns out that logical closure obscures the distinctions that are needed for a meaningful analysis of coherence. It is c...
Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:

Autor*in:	Hansson, Sven Ove [verfasserIn]

Format:	Artikel
Sprache:	Englisch

Erschienen:	2006

Schlagwörter:	General Theory Weak Version Belief Revision Meaningful Analysis Revision Theory

Anmerkung:	© Springer 2006

Übergeordnetes Werk:	Enthalten in: Philosophical studies - Kluwer Academic Publishers, 1950, 128(2006), 1 vom: März, Seite 93-108
Übergeordnetes Werk:	volume:128 ; year:2006 ; number:1 ; month:03 ; pages:93-108

Links:	Volltext

DOI / URN:	10.1007/s11098-005-4058-7

Katalog-ID:	OLC2040356991

Internformat


LEADER	01000caa a22002652 4500
001	OLC2040356991
003	DE-627
005	20230504003151.0
007	tu
008	200819s2006 xx \|\|\|\|\| 00\| \|\|eng c
024	7		\|a 10.1007/s11098-005-4058-7 \|2 doi
035			\|a (DE-627)OLC2040356991
035			\|a (DE-He213)s11098-005-4058-7-p
040			\|a DE-627 \|b ger \|c DE-627 \|e rakwb
041			\|a eng
082	0	4	\|a 100 \|q VZ
084			\|a 5,1 \|2 ssgn
084			\|a PHILOS \|q DE-12 \|2 fid
084			\|a LING \|q DE-30 \|2 fid
100	1		\|a Hansson, Sven Ove \|e verfasserin \|4 aut
245	1	0	\|a Coherence in Epistemology and Belief Revision*
264		1	\|c 2006
336			\|a Text \|b txt \|2 rdacontent
337			\|a ohne Hilfsmittel zu benutzen \|b n \|2 rdamedia
338			\|a Band \|b nc \|2 rdacarrier
500			\|a © Springer 2006
520			\|a Abstract A general theory of coherence is proposed, in which systemic and relational coherence are shown to be interdefinable. When this theory is applied to sets of sentences, it turns out that logical closure obscures the distinctions that are needed for a meaningful analysis of coherence. It is concluded that references to “all beliefs” in coherentist phrases such as “all beliefs support each other” have to be modified so that merely derived beliefs are excluded. Therefore, in order to avoid absurd conclusions, coherentists have to accept a weak version of epistemic priority, that sorts out merely derived beliefs. Furthermore, it is shown that in belief revision theory, coherence cannot be adequately represented by logical closure, but has to be represented separately.
650		4	\|a General Theory
650		4	\|a Weak Version
650		4	\|a Belief Revision
650		4	\|a Meaningful Analysis
650		4	\|a Revision Theory
773	0	8	\|i Enthalten in \|t Philosophical studies \|d Kluwer Academic Publishers, 1950 \|g 128(2006), 1 vom: März, Seite 93-108 \|w (DE-627)129094803 \|w (DE-600)7320-9 \|w (DE-576)014430851 \|x 0031-8116 \|7 nnns
773	1	8	\|g volume:128 \|g year:2006 \|g number:1 \|g month:03 \|g pages:93-108
856	4	1	\|u https://doi.org/10.1007/s11098-005-4058-7 \|z lizenzpflichtig \|3 Volltext
912			\|a GBV_USEFLAG_A
912			\|a SYSFLAG_A
912			\|a GBV_OLC
912			\|a FID-PHILOS
912			\|a FID-LING
912			\|a SSG-OLC-PHI
912			\|a GBV_ILN_11
912			\|a GBV_ILN_21
912			\|a GBV_ILN_22
912			\|a GBV_ILN_39
912			\|a GBV_ILN_40
912			\|a GBV_ILN_62
912			\|a GBV_ILN_72
912			\|a GBV_ILN_2003
912			\|a GBV_ILN_2007
912			\|a GBV_ILN_4012
912			\|a GBV_ILN_4027
912			\|a GBV_ILN_4082
912			\|a GBV_ILN_4103
912			\|a GBV_ILN_4112
912			\|a GBV_ILN_4125
912			\|a GBV_ILN_4317
912			\|a GBV_ILN_4318
912			\|a GBV_ILN_4324
912			\|a GBV_ILN_4325
951			\|a AR
952			\|d 128 \|j 2006 \|e 1 \|c 03 \|h 93-108

Indexfelder

author_variant	s o h so soh
matchkey_str	article:00318116:2006----::oeecieitmlgadei
hierarchy_sort_str	2006
publishDate	2006
allfields	10.1007/s11098-005-4058-7 doi (DE-627)OLC2040356991 (DE-He213)s11098-005-4058-7-p DE-627 ger DE-627 rakwb eng 100 VZ 5,1 ssgn PHILOS DE-12 fid LING DE-30 fid Hansson, Sven Ove verfasserin aut Coherence in Epistemology and Belief Revision* 2006 Text txt rdacontent ohne Hilfsmittel zu benutzen n rdamedia Band nc rdacarrier © Springer 2006 Abstract A general theory of coherence is proposed, in which systemic and relational coherence are shown to be interdefinable. When this theory is applied to sets of sentences, it turns out that logical closure obscures the distinctions that are needed for a meaningful analysis of coherence. It is concluded that references to “all beliefs” in coherentist phrases such as “all beliefs support each other” have to be modified so that merely derived beliefs are excluded. Therefore, in order to avoid absurd conclusions, coherentists have to accept a weak version of epistemic priority, that sorts out merely derived beliefs. Furthermore, it is shown that in belief revision theory, coherence cannot be adequately represented by logical closure, but has to be represented separately. General Theory Weak Version Belief Revision Meaningful Analysis Revision Theory Enthalten in Philosophical studies Kluwer Academic Publishers, 1950 128(2006), 1 vom: März, Seite 93-108 (DE-627)129094803 (DE-600)7320-9 (DE-576)014430851 0031-8116 nnns volume:128 year:2006 number:1 month:03 pages:93-108 https://doi.org/10.1007/s11098-005-4058-7 lizenzpflichtig Volltext GBV_USEFLAG_A SYSFLAG_A GBV_OLC FID-PHILOS FID-LING SSG-OLC-PHI GBV_ILN_11 GBV_ILN_21 GBV_ILN_22 GBV_ILN_39 GBV_ILN_40 GBV_ILN_62 GBV_ILN_72 GBV_ILN_2003 GBV_ILN_2007 GBV_ILN_4012 GBV_ILN_4027 GBV_ILN_4082 GBV_ILN_4103 GBV_ILN_4112 GBV_ILN_4125 GBV_ILN_4317 GBV_ILN_4318 GBV_ILN_4324 GBV_ILN_4325 AR 128 2006 1 03 93-108
spelling	10.1007/s11098-005-4058-7 doi (DE-627)OLC2040356991 (DE-He213)s11098-005-4058-7-p DE-627 ger DE-627 rakwb eng 100 VZ 5,1 ssgn PHILOS DE-12 fid LING DE-30 fid Hansson, Sven Ove verfasserin aut Coherence in Epistemology and Belief Revision* 2006 Text txt rdacontent ohne Hilfsmittel zu benutzen n rdamedia Band nc rdacarrier © Springer 2006 Abstract A general theory of coherence is proposed, in which systemic and relational coherence are shown to be interdefinable. When this theory is applied to sets of sentences, it turns out that logical closure obscures the distinctions that are needed for a meaningful analysis of coherence. It is concluded that references to “all beliefs” in coherentist phrases such as “all beliefs support each other” have to be modified so that merely derived beliefs are excluded. Therefore, in order to avoid absurd conclusions, coherentists have to accept a weak version of epistemic priority, that sorts out merely derived beliefs. Furthermore, it is shown that in belief revision theory, coherence cannot be adequately represented by logical closure, but has to be represented separately. General Theory Weak Version Belief Revision Meaningful Analysis Revision Theory Enthalten in Philosophical studies Kluwer Academic Publishers, 1950 128(2006), 1 vom: März, Seite 93-108 (DE-627)129094803 (DE-600)7320-9 (DE-576)014430851 0031-8116 nnns volume:128 year:2006 number:1 month:03 pages:93-108 https://doi.org/10.1007/s11098-005-4058-7 lizenzpflichtig Volltext GBV_USEFLAG_A SYSFLAG_A GBV_OLC FID-PHILOS FID-LING SSG-OLC-PHI GBV_ILN_11 GBV_ILN_21 GBV_ILN_22 GBV_ILN_39 GBV_ILN_40 GBV_ILN_62 GBV_ILN_72 GBV_ILN_2003 GBV_ILN_2007 GBV_ILN_4012 GBV_ILN_4027 GBV_ILN_4082 GBV_ILN_4103 GBV_ILN_4112 GBV_ILN_4125 GBV_ILN_4317 GBV_ILN_4318 GBV_ILN_4324 GBV_ILN_4325 AR 128 2006 1 03 93-108
allfields_unstemmed	10.1007/s11098-005-4058-7 doi (DE-627)OLC2040356991 (DE-He213)s11098-005-4058-7-p DE-627 ger DE-627 rakwb eng 100 VZ 5,1 ssgn PHILOS DE-12 fid LING DE-30 fid Hansson, Sven Ove verfasserin aut Coherence in Epistemology and Belief Revision* 2006 Text txt rdacontent ohne Hilfsmittel zu benutzen n rdamedia Band nc rdacarrier © Springer 2006 Abstract A general theory of coherence is proposed, in which systemic and relational coherence are shown to be interdefinable. When this theory is applied to sets of sentences, it turns out that logical closure obscures the distinctions that are needed for a meaningful analysis of coherence. It is concluded that references to “all beliefs” in coherentist phrases such as “all beliefs support each other” have to be modified so that merely derived beliefs are excluded. Therefore, in order to avoid absurd conclusions, coherentists have to accept a weak version of epistemic priority, that sorts out merely derived beliefs. Furthermore, it is shown that in belief revision theory, coherence cannot be adequately represented by logical closure, but has to be represented separately. General Theory Weak Version Belief Revision Meaningful Analysis Revision Theory Enthalten in Philosophical studies Kluwer Academic Publishers, 1950 128(2006), 1 vom: März, Seite 93-108 (DE-627)129094803 (DE-600)7320-9 (DE-576)014430851 0031-8116 nnns volume:128 year:2006 number:1 month:03 pages:93-108 https://doi.org/10.1007/s11098-005-4058-7 lizenzpflichtig Volltext GBV_USEFLAG_A SYSFLAG_A GBV_OLC FID-PHILOS FID-LING SSG-OLC-PHI GBV_ILN_11 GBV_ILN_21 GBV_ILN_22 GBV_ILN_39 GBV_ILN_40 GBV_ILN_62 GBV_ILN_72 GBV_ILN_2003 GBV_ILN_2007 GBV_ILN_4012 GBV_ILN_4027 GBV_ILN_4082 GBV_ILN_4103 GBV_ILN_4112 GBV_ILN_4125 GBV_ILN_4317 GBV_ILN_4318 GBV_ILN_4324 GBV_ILN_4325 AR 128 2006 1 03 93-108
allfieldsGer	10.1007/s11098-005-4058-7 doi (DE-627)OLC2040356991 (DE-He213)s11098-005-4058-7-p DE-627 ger DE-627 rakwb eng 100 VZ 5,1 ssgn PHILOS DE-12 fid LING DE-30 fid Hansson, Sven Ove verfasserin aut Coherence in Epistemology and Belief Revision* 2006 Text txt rdacontent ohne Hilfsmittel zu benutzen n rdamedia Band nc rdacarrier © Springer 2006 Abstract A general theory of coherence is proposed, in which systemic and relational coherence are shown to be interdefinable. When this theory is applied to sets of sentences, it turns out that logical closure obscures the distinctions that are needed for a meaningful analysis of coherence. It is concluded that references to “all beliefs” in coherentist phrases such as “all beliefs support each other” have to be modified so that merely derived beliefs are excluded. Therefore, in order to avoid absurd conclusions, coherentists have to accept a weak version of epistemic priority, that sorts out merely derived beliefs. Furthermore, it is shown that in belief revision theory, coherence cannot be adequately represented by logical closure, but has to be represented separately. General Theory Weak Version Belief Revision Meaningful Analysis Revision Theory Enthalten in Philosophical studies Kluwer Academic Publishers, 1950 128(2006), 1 vom: März, Seite 93-108 (DE-627)129094803 (DE-600)7320-9 (DE-576)014430851 0031-8116 nnns volume:128 year:2006 number:1 month:03 pages:93-108 https://doi.org/10.1007/s11098-005-4058-7 lizenzpflichtig Volltext GBV_USEFLAG_A SYSFLAG_A GBV_OLC FID-PHILOS FID-LING SSG-OLC-PHI GBV_ILN_11 GBV_ILN_21 GBV_ILN_22 GBV_ILN_39 GBV_ILN_40 GBV_ILN_62 GBV_ILN_72 GBV_ILN_2003 GBV_ILN_2007 GBV_ILN_4012 GBV_ILN_4027 GBV_ILN_4082 GBV_ILN_4103 GBV_ILN_4112 GBV_ILN_4125 GBV_ILN_4317 GBV_ILN_4318 GBV_ILN_4324 GBV_ILN_4325 AR 128 2006 1 03 93-108
allfieldsSound	10.1007/s11098-005-4058-7 doi (DE-627)OLC2040356991 (DE-He213)s11098-005-4058-7-p DE-627 ger DE-627 rakwb eng 100 VZ 5,1 ssgn PHILOS DE-12 fid LING DE-30 fid Hansson, Sven Ove verfasserin aut Coherence in Epistemology and Belief Revision* 2006 Text txt rdacontent ohne Hilfsmittel zu benutzen n rdamedia Band nc rdacarrier © Springer 2006 Abstract A general theory of coherence is proposed, in which systemic and relational coherence are shown to be interdefinable. When this theory is applied to sets of sentences, it turns out that logical closure obscures the distinctions that are needed for a meaningful analysis of coherence. It is concluded that references to “all beliefs” in coherentist phrases such as “all beliefs support each other” have to be modified so that merely derived beliefs are excluded. Therefore, in order to avoid absurd conclusions, coherentists have to accept a weak version of epistemic priority, that sorts out merely derived beliefs. Furthermore, it is shown that in belief revision theory, coherence cannot be adequately represented by logical closure, but has to be represented separately. General Theory Weak Version Belief Revision Meaningful Analysis Revision Theory Enthalten in Philosophical studies Kluwer Academic Publishers, 1950 128(2006), 1 vom: März, Seite 93-108 (DE-627)129094803 (DE-600)7320-9 (DE-576)014430851 0031-8116 nnns volume:128 year:2006 number:1 month:03 pages:93-108 https://doi.org/10.1007/s11098-005-4058-7 lizenzpflichtig Volltext GBV_USEFLAG_A SYSFLAG_A GBV_OLC FID-PHILOS FID-LING SSG-OLC-PHI GBV_ILN_11 GBV_ILN_21 GBV_ILN_22 GBV_ILN_39 GBV_ILN_40 GBV_ILN_62 GBV_ILN_72 GBV_ILN_2003 GBV_ILN_2007 GBV_ILN_4012 GBV_ILN_4027 GBV_ILN_4082 GBV_ILN_4103 GBV_ILN_4112 GBV_ILN_4125 GBV_ILN_4317 GBV_ILN_4318 GBV_ILN_4324 GBV_ILN_4325 AR 128 2006 1 03 93-108
language	English
source	Enthalten in Philosophical studies 128(2006), 1 vom: März, Seite 93-108 volume:128 year:2006 number:1 month:03 pages:93-108
sourceStr	Enthalten in Philosophical studies 128(2006), 1 vom: März, Seite 93-108 volume:128 year:2006 number:1 month:03 pages:93-108
format_phy_str_mv	Article
institution	findex.gbv.de
topic_facet	General Theory Weak Version Belief Revision Meaningful Analysis Revision Theory
dewey-raw	100
isfreeaccess_bool	false
container_title	Philosophical studies
authorswithroles_txt_mv	Hansson, Sven Ove @@aut@@
publishDateDaySort_date	2006-03-01T00:00:00Z
hierarchy_top_id	129094803
dewey-sort	3100
id	OLC2040356991
language_de	englisch
fullrecord	<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><collection xmlns="http://www.loc.gov/MARC21/slim"><record><leader>01000caa a22002652 4500</leader><controlfield tag="001">OLC2040356991</controlfield><controlfield tag="003">DE-627</controlfield><controlfield tag="005">20230504003151.0</controlfield><controlfield tag="007">tu</controlfield><controlfield tag="008">200819s2006 xx \|\|\|\|\| 00\| \|\|eng c</controlfield><datafield tag="024" ind1="7" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">10.1007/s11098-005-4058-7</subfield><subfield code="2">doi</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="035" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">(DE-627)OLC2040356991</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="035" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">(DE-He213)s11098-005-4058-7-p</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="040" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">DE-627</subfield><subfield code="b">ger</subfield><subfield code="c">DE-627</subfield><subfield code="e">rakwb</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="041" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">eng</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="082" ind1="0" ind2="4"><subfield code="a">100</subfield><subfield code="q">VZ</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="084" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">5,1</subfield><subfield code="2">ssgn</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="084" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">PHILOS</subfield><subfield code="q">DE-12</subfield><subfield code="2">fid</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="084" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">LING</subfield><subfield code="q">DE-30</subfield><subfield code="2">fid</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="100" ind1="1" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Hansson, Sven Ove</subfield><subfield code="e">verfasserin</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="245" ind1="1" ind2="0"><subfield code="a">Coherence in Epistemology and Belief Revision*</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="264" ind1=" " ind2="1"><subfield code="c">2006</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="336" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Text</subfield><subfield code="b">txt</subfield><subfield code="2">rdacontent</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="337" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">ohne Hilfsmittel zu benutzen</subfield><subfield code="b">n</subfield><subfield code="2">rdamedia</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="338" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Band</subfield><subfield code="b">nc</subfield><subfield code="2">rdacarrier</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="500" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">© Springer 2006</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="520" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Abstract A general theory of coherence is proposed, in which systemic and relational coherence are shown to be interdefinable. When this theory is applied to sets of sentences, it turns out that logical closure obscures the distinctions that are needed for a meaningful analysis of coherence. It is concluded that references to “all beliefs” in coherentist phrases such as “all beliefs support each other” have to be modified so that merely derived beliefs are excluded. Therefore, in order to avoid absurd conclusions, coherentists have to accept a weak version of epistemic priority, that sorts out merely derived beliefs. Furthermore, it is shown that in belief revision theory, coherence cannot be adequately represented by logical closure, but has to be represented separately.</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">General Theory</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">Weak Version</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">Belief Revision</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">Meaningful Analysis</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">Revision Theory</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="773" ind1="0" ind2="8"><subfield code="i">Enthalten in</subfield><subfield code="t">Philosophical studies</subfield><subfield code="d">Kluwer Academic Publishers, 1950</subfield><subfield code="g">128(2006), 1 vom: März, Seite 93-108</subfield><subfield code="w">(DE-627)129094803</subfield><subfield code="w">(DE-600)7320-9</subfield><subfield code="w">(DE-576)014430851</subfield><subfield code="x">0031-8116</subfield><subfield code="7">nnns</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="773" ind1="1" ind2="8"><subfield code="g">volume:128</subfield><subfield code="g">year:2006</subfield><subfield code="g">number:1</subfield><subfield code="g">month:03</subfield><subfield code="g">pages:93-108</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="856" ind1="4" ind2="1"><subfield code="u">https://doi.org/10.1007/s11098-005-4058-7</subfield><subfield code="z">lizenzpflichtig</subfield><subfield code="3">Volltext</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_USEFLAG_A</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">SYSFLAG_A</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_OLC</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">FID-PHILOS</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">FID-LING</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">SSG-OLC-PHI</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_11</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_21</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_22</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_39</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_40</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_62</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_72</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2003</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2007</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4012</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4027</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4082</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4103</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4112</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4125</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4317</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4318</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4324</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4325</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="951" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">AR</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="952" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="d">128</subfield><subfield code="j">2006</subfield><subfield code="e">1</subfield><subfield code="c">03</subfield><subfield code="h">93-108</subfield></datafield></record></collection>
author	Hansson, Sven Ove
spellingShingle	Hansson, Sven Ove ddc 100 ssgn 5,1 fid PHILOS fid LING misc General Theory misc Weak Version misc Belief Revision misc Meaningful Analysis misc Revision Theory Coherence in Epistemology and Belief Revision*
authorStr	Hansson, Sven Ove
ppnlink_with_tag_str_mv	@@773@@(DE-627)129094803
format	Article
dewey-ones	100 - Philosophy & psychology
delete_txt_mv	keep
author_role	aut
collection	OLC
remote_str	false
illustrated	Not Illustrated
issn	0031-8116
topic_title	100 VZ 5,1 ssgn PHILOS DE-12 fid LING DE-30 fid Coherence in Epistemology and Belief Revision* General Theory Weak Version Belief Revision Meaningful Analysis Revision Theory
topic	ddc 100 ssgn 5,1 fid PHILOS fid LING misc General Theory misc Weak Version misc Belief Revision misc Meaningful Analysis misc Revision Theory
topic_unstemmed	ddc 100 ssgn 5,1 fid PHILOS fid LING misc General Theory misc Weak Version misc Belief Revision misc Meaningful Analysis misc Revision Theory
topic_browse	ddc 100 ssgn 5,1 fid PHILOS fid LING misc General Theory misc Weak Version misc Belief Revision misc Meaningful Analysis misc Revision Theory
format_facet	Aufsätze Gedruckte Aufsätze
format_main_str_mv	Text Zeitschrift/Artikel
carriertype_str_mv	nc
hierarchy_parent_title	Philosophical studies
hierarchy_parent_id	129094803
dewey-tens	100 - Philosophy
hierarchy_top_title	Philosophical studies
isfreeaccess_txt	false
familylinks_str_mv	(DE-627)129094803 (DE-600)7320-9 (DE-576)014430851
title	Coherence in Epistemology and Belief Revision*
ctrlnum	(DE-627)OLC2040356991 (DE-He213)s11098-005-4058-7-p
title_full	Coherence in Epistemology and Belief Revision*
author_sort	Hansson, Sven Ove
journal	Philosophical studies
journalStr	Philosophical studies
lang_code	eng
isOA_bool	false
dewey-hundreds	100 - Philosophy & psychology
recordtype	marc
publishDateSort	2006
contenttype_str_mv	txt
container_start_page	93
author_browse	Hansson, Sven Ove
container_volume	128
class	100 VZ 5,1 ssgn PHILOS DE-12 fid LING DE-30 fid
format_se	Aufsätze
author-letter	Hansson, Sven Ove
doi_str_mv	10.1007/s11098-005-4058-7
dewey-full	100
title_sort	coherence in epistemology and belief revision*
title_auth	Coherence in Epistemology and Belief Revision*
abstract	Abstract A general theory of coherence is proposed, in which systemic and relational coherence are shown to be interdefinable. When this theory is applied to sets of sentences, it turns out that logical closure obscures the distinctions that are needed for a meaningful analysis of coherence. It is concluded that references to “all beliefs” in coherentist phrases such as “all beliefs support each other” have to be modified so that merely derived beliefs are excluded. Therefore, in order to avoid absurd conclusions, coherentists have to accept a weak version of epistemic priority, that sorts out merely derived beliefs. Furthermore, it is shown that in belief revision theory, coherence cannot be adequately represented by logical closure, but has to be represented separately. © Springer 2006
abstractGer	Abstract A general theory of coherence is proposed, in which systemic and relational coherence are shown to be interdefinable. When this theory is applied to sets of sentences, it turns out that logical closure obscures the distinctions that are needed for a meaningful analysis of coherence. It is concluded that references to “all beliefs” in coherentist phrases such as “all beliefs support each other” have to be modified so that merely derived beliefs are excluded. Therefore, in order to avoid absurd conclusions, coherentists have to accept a weak version of epistemic priority, that sorts out merely derived beliefs. Furthermore, it is shown that in belief revision theory, coherence cannot be adequately represented by logical closure, but has to be represented separately. © Springer 2006
abstract_unstemmed	Abstract A general theory of coherence is proposed, in which systemic and relational coherence are shown to be interdefinable. When this theory is applied to sets of sentences, it turns out that logical closure obscures the distinctions that are needed for a meaningful analysis of coherence. It is concluded that references to “all beliefs” in coherentist phrases such as “all beliefs support each other” have to be modified so that merely derived beliefs are excluded. Therefore, in order to avoid absurd conclusions, coherentists have to accept a weak version of epistemic priority, that sorts out merely derived beliefs. Furthermore, it is shown that in belief revision theory, coherence cannot be adequately represented by logical closure, but has to be represented separately. © Springer 2006
collection_details	GBV_USEFLAG_A SYSFLAG_A GBV_OLC FID-PHILOS FID-LING SSG-OLC-PHI GBV_ILN_11 GBV_ILN_21 GBV_ILN_22 GBV_ILN_39 GBV_ILN_40 GBV_ILN_62 GBV_ILN_72 GBV_ILN_2003 GBV_ILN_2007 GBV_ILN_4012 GBV_ILN_4027 GBV_ILN_4082 GBV_ILN_4103 GBV_ILN_4112 GBV_ILN_4125 GBV_ILN_4317 GBV_ILN_4318 GBV_ILN_4324 GBV_ILN_4325
container_issue	1
title_short	Coherence in Epistemology and Belief Revision*
url	https://doi.org/10.1007/s11098-005-4058-7
remote_bool	false
ppnlink	129094803
mediatype_str_mv	n
isOA_txt	false
hochschulschrift_bool	false
doi_str	10.1007/s11098-005-4058-7
up_date	2024-07-04T01:59:04.003Z
_version_	1803611898124435456
fullrecord_marcxml	<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><collection xmlns="http://www.loc.gov/MARC21/slim"><record><leader>01000caa a22002652 4500</leader><controlfield tag="001">OLC2040356991</controlfield><controlfield tag="003">DE-627</controlfield><controlfield tag="005">20230504003151.0</controlfield><controlfield tag="007">tu</controlfield><controlfield tag="008">200819s2006 xx \|\|\|\|\| 00\| \|\|eng c</controlfield><datafield tag="024" ind1="7" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">10.1007/s11098-005-4058-7</subfield><subfield code="2">doi</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="035" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">(DE-627)OLC2040356991</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="035" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">(DE-He213)s11098-005-4058-7-p</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="040" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">DE-627</subfield><subfield code="b">ger</subfield><subfield code="c">DE-627</subfield><subfield code="e">rakwb</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="041" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">eng</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="082" ind1="0" ind2="4"><subfield code="a">100</subfield><subfield code="q">VZ</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="084" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">5,1</subfield><subfield code="2">ssgn</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="084" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">PHILOS</subfield><subfield code="q">DE-12</subfield><subfield code="2">fid</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="084" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">LING</subfield><subfield code="q">DE-30</subfield><subfield code="2">fid</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="100" ind1="1" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Hansson, Sven Ove</subfield><subfield code="e">verfasserin</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="245" ind1="1" ind2="0"><subfield code="a">Coherence in Epistemology and Belief Revision*</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="264" ind1=" " ind2="1"><subfield code="c">2006</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="336" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Text</subfield><subfield code="b">txt</subfield><subfield code="2">rdacontent</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="337" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">ohne Hilfsmittel zu benutzen</subfield><subfield code="b">n</subfield><subfield code="2">rdamedia</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="338" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Band</subfield><subfield code="b">nc</subfield><subfield code="2">rdacarrier</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="500" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">© Springer 2006</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="520" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Abstract A general theory of coherence is proposed, in which systemic and relational coherence are shown to be interdefinable. When this theory is applied to sets of sentences, it turns out that logical closure obscures the distinctions that are needed for a meaningful analysis of coherence. It is concluded that references to “all beliefs” in coherentist phrases such as “all beliefs support each other” have to be modified so that merely derived beliefs are excluded. Therefore, in order to avoid absurd conclusions, coherentists have to accept a weak version of epistemic priority, that sorts out merely derived beliefs. Furthermore, it is shown that in belief revision theory, coherence cannot be adequately represented by logical closure, but has to be represented separately.</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">General Theory</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">Weak Version</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">Belief Revision</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">Meaningful Analysis</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">Revision Theory</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="773" ind1="0" ind2="8"><subfield code="i">Enthalten in</subfield><subfield code="t">Philosophical studies</subfield><subfield code="d">Kluwer Academic Publishers, 1950</subfield><subfield code="g">128(2006), 1 vom: März, Seite 93-108</subfield><subfield code="w">(DE-627)129094803</subfield><subfield code="w">(DE-600)7320-9</subfield><subfield code="w">(DE-576)014430851</subfield><subfield code="x">0031-8116</subfield><subfield code="7">nnns</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="773" ind1="1" ind2="8"><subfield code="g">volume:128</subfield><subfield code="g">year:2006</subfield><subfield code="g">number:1</subfield><subfield code="g">month:03</subfield><subfield code="g">pages:93-108</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="856" ind1="4" ind2="1"><subfield code="u">https://doi.org/10.1007/s11098-005-4058-7</subfield><subfield code="z">lizenzpflichtig</subfield><subfield code="3">Volltext</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_USEFLAG_A</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">SYSFLAG_A</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_OLC</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">FID-PHILOS</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">FID-LING</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">SSG-OLC-PHI</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_11</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_21</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_22</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_39</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_40</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_62</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_72</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2003</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2007</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4012</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4027</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4082</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4103</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4112</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4125</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4317</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4318</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4324</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4325</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="951" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">AR</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="952" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="d">128</subfield><subfield code="j">2006</subfield><subfield code="e">1</subfield><subfield code="c">03</subfield><subfield code="h">93-108</subfield></datafield></record></collection>
score	7.401903

Nicht das Richtige dabei?

Schreiben Sie uns!

Coherence in Epistemology and Belief Revision*

Nicht das Richtige dabei?

Zugang & Verfügbarkeit

Vorhandene Bände

Nicht das Richtige dabei?