That's a fair point. In responding I conflated two different acts of categorizing. I ended up talking about counting acts of categorizing, which wasn'...
Yes. Should have made it clearer that inference preserving truth is something like a precedent for what we expect inference to do with justification. ...
I think there's a misunderstanding here. I wasn't claiming that, to take your example, people can simply be pegged to a spot on some approval scale. I...
I'm not crazy about this one. (But agree with everything else.) I'd rather say something more like what Gettier says: whatever justification the premi...
Should also have explicitly said there's not a single genome to find its way around the valley. You get whatever you get when some part of the populat...
I'm not sure this is the right way to look at it, although I'm far from being an expert. There isn't a one-to-one map between an organism's features a...
But doesn't classifying or categorizing things presuppose the possibility of counting them? The qualitative and quantitative are different, yes, but y...
That's really not a bad starting point in my opinion. The first three billion years of life on Earth is single-cell organisms. The last billion is mul...
Right, that's part of Gettier's setup. The only belief he attributes the Smith is the belief that p v q; he seems purposefully to avoid attributing p,...
Well, insofar as the phrase "survival of the fittest" has any use, it's just this: you don't get to reproduce if you don't survive. Evolution is about...
This part is right and interesting. It's entropy. There are more possible ways for your car not to work than for it to work. Not obvious that this app...
I'm not sure. Think I rushed it. Better might be: 4. If Big Pharma did not fund them, biologists would not tell people they are only chemicals. 5. Big...
So your argument is: 1. If biologists did not tell them so, people would not believe they are only chemicals. 2. If people did not believe they were o...
Let S be the set of all statements. Let z be the string "If x ? S, then x is false." Assume z ? S. If z is true, then z is false. If z is false, then ...
Jerry Fodor made a very similar claim about biologists en masse giving up the idea of adaptation. The LRB, which published a precis of his book about ...
Same pattern as in Case II: Smith has strong evidence for the conjunctive proposition (d), but Gettier never says that he accepts it, only that he der...
It's ambiguous. "S is justified in believing that P" could mean: (1) If S were to believe that P, his belief that P would be justified, or (2) S belie...
From the Lycan paper I linked: The idea here is that Henry's belief is too lucky -- if he had happened to form the same belief looking at one of the o...
Those are from the first 5 pages: These are from the last five pages: You can't seriously suggest that you haven't been arguing that Smith believed P?...
Yes to the first, no to the second. For instance, there's the dog-sheep: You see in a field what looks to be a sheep and form the belief, based on dir...
The upshot for our discussion here: Everywhere I said all Smith's troubles flow from his having a false belief that Jones owns a Ford, I was wrong. Ev...
No. Many involve something like faulty definite descriptions along the lines of Case I, and many involve more than a passing resemblance to the argume...
Should probably change that to: 6a. If the evidence for (h) is strong enough, it justifies Smith's belief that (h) 6b. Smith's evidence for (h) is str...
I think I'd read somewhere before that there are doubts about how Gettier's original cases are constructed, but I hadn't though much about it, as we h...
So Smith believes that the proposition "Either Jones owns a Ford or Brown is in Barcelona" is true because Jones owns a Ford, and he does not believe ...
But he does not believe that Jones owns a Ford or Brown is in Barcelona, and he does not believe that "Jones owns a Ford or Brown is in Barcelona" is ...
Comments