Journal Article10.1080/10002003058538741
Contrastive knowledge
Antti Karjalainen,Adam Morton +1 more
- 01 May 2003
Vol. 6, pp 74-89
2
TL;DR: Contrastive knowledge describes the three-place relation between a person, a target proposition, and a contrasting proposition. It applies to various cases and is subject to fewer complications than non-contrastive knowledge.
read more
Abstract: Abstract We describe the three place relation of contrastive knowledge, which holds between a person, a target proposition, and a contrasting proposition. The person knows that p rather than that q. We argue for three claims about this relation. (a) Many common sense and philosophical ascriptions of knowledge can be understood in terms of it. (b) Its application is subject to fewer complications than non-contrastive knowledge is. (c) It applies over a wide range of human and nonhuman cases.
read more
Chat with Paper
AI Agents for this Paper
Find similar papers on Google Scholar, PubMed and Arxiv
Write a critical review of this paper
Analyze citations of this paper to find unaddressed research gaps
Citations
Defending Contrastivism
Martijn Blaauw
TL;DR: This paper defends epistemological contrastivism against Steven Luper's objections, arguing that his criticisms fail to undermine the theory, thereby strengthening the case for contrastivism as a viable anti-skeptical epistemological framework.
References
•Book
Scientific Reasoning: The Bayesian Approach
Colin Howson,Peter Urbach +1 more
- 01 Jan 1989
TL;DR: This new edition of Howson and Urbach's account of scientific method from the Bayesian standpoint includes chapter exercises and extended material on topics such as regression analysis, distributions densities, randomisation and conditionalisation.
1.4K
Solving the Skeptical Problem
TL;DR: In this paper, Nozick's account of knowledge and skepticism is used to explain why, even though I feel inclined to say that I know the Bulls won their game last night because I read the result in a single newspaper, I still feel strongly pulled toward admitting the (mildly) skeptical claim that I don't know that the paper isn't mistaken about which team won.
1K
•Book
Knowing Who
Stephen E. Boër,William G. Lycan +1 more
- 23 Dec 1985
TL;DR: For instance, the authors argued that knowing how to find coffee in New York City is a fundamentally different kind of cognitive state from knowing why to find a coffee in Manhattan, or even knowing how Bill finds coffee in London.
654
Logic of Statistical Inference.
M. S. Bartlett,Ian Hacking +1 more
Abstract: Preface 1. Long run frequencies 2. The chance set-up 3. Support 4. The long run 5. The law of likelihood 6. Statistical tests 7. Theories of testing 8. Random sampling 9. The fiducial argument 10. Estimation 11. Point estimation 12. Bayes' theory 13. The subjective theory.
393