Conclusion

Author:

Mahtani Anna

Abstract

Abstract This short chapter gives a brief summary of the message that a user of the credence framework should take away from this book. Firstly, credence claims are opaque. When we consider the credences that an agent has about some person or object, it matters how that person or object is designated. Secondly, this simple tenet has wide-ranging and important implications for users of the credence framework—for the reflection and deference principles, for the Principal Principle, for decision theory, and for various views in welfare economics. Thirdly, there is no easy way for the underlying framework to accommodate the tenet that credence claims are opaque. The hope is that the credence framework will continue to be used, but with an awareness of the issues raised in this book.

Publisher

Oxford University PressOxford

Reference182 articles.

1. Theories of Actuality.;Nous,1974

2. Prioritarianism: A Response to Critics.;Politics, Philosophy and Economics,2019

3. Some Problems for Conditionalization and Reflection.;Journal of Philosophy,2003

4. Philosophy and Phenomenological Research;The Logic of Opacity.,2019

同舟云学术

1.学者识别学者识别

2.学术分析学术分析

3.人才评估人才评估

"同舟云学术"是以全球学者为主线,采集、加工和组织学术论文而形成的新型学术文献查询和分析系统,可以对全球学者进行文献检索和人才价值评估。用户可以通过关注某些学科领域的顶尖人物而持续追踪该领域的学科进展和研究前沿。经过近期的数据扩容,当前同舟云学术共收录了国内外主流学术期刊6万余种,收集的期刊论文及会议论文总量共计约1.5亿篇,并以每天添加12000余篇中外论文的速度递增。我们也可以为用户提供个性化、定制化的学者数据。欢迎来电咨询!咨询电话:010-8811{复制后删除}0370

www.globalauthorid.com

TOP

Copyright © 2019-2024 北京同舟云网络信息技术有限公司
京公网安备11010802033243号  京ICP备18003416号-3