A Tale of Two Epistemologies?

  title={A Tale of Two Epistemologies?},
  author={Alan H{\'a}jek and Hanti Lin},
  journal={Res Philosophica},
So-called “traditional epistemology” and “Bayesian epistemology” share a word, but it may often seem that the enterprises hardly share a subject matter. They differ in their central concepts. They differ in their main concerns. They differ in their main theoretical moves. And they often differ in their methodology. However, in the last decade or so, there have been a number of attempts to build bridges between the two epistemologies. Indeed, many would say that there is just one branch of… 

Perception and Probability

  • A. Byrne
  • Philosophy
    Philosophy and Phenomenological Research
  • 2021
1: Introduction One very popular framework in contemporary epistemology is Bayesian. The central epistemic state is subjective confidence, or credence. Traditional epistemic states like belief and

Belief and credence: why the attitude-type matters

In this paper, I argue that the relationship between belief and credence is a central question in epistemology. This is because the belief-credence relationship has significant implications for a

Teaching & learning guide for: The relationship between belief and credence

AUTHOR'S INTRODUCTION Sometimes epistemologists theorize about belief, a tripartite attitude on which one can believe, withhold belief on, or disbelieve a proposition. This belief framework underlies

Theorizing about faith with Lara Buchak

Abstract What is faith? Lara Buchak has done as much as anyone recently to answer this question in a sensible and instructive fashion. As it turns out, her writings reveal two theories of faith, an

The relationship between belief and credence

Funding information Australian Research Council, Grant/Award Number: D170101394 Abstract Sometimes epistemologists theorize about belief, a tripartite attitude on which one can believe, withhold



Can we do without pragmatic encroachment

And John Hawthorne (2004) and Jason Stanley (2005) have argued that what it takes to turn true belief into knowledge is sensitive to the practical environment the subject is in. These authors seem to

Epistemology Formalized

As we often tell our undergraduates, epistemology is the study of knowledge . Given just this simple definition, ‘formal epistemology’ seems like a misnomer for the philosophical program inspired by

Accuracy and Coherence: Prospects for an Alethic Epistemology of Partial Belief

Traditional epistemology is both dogmatic and alethic. It is dogmatic in the sense that it takes the fundamental doxastic attitude to be full belief, the state in which a person categorically accepts

Stick To What You Know

Iwill be arguing that a subject’s belief thatp is justified if andonly if heknows that p: justification is knowledge. I will start by describing two broad classes of allegedly justified beliefs that

Accuracy, Coherence, and Evidence

Taking Joyce’s (1998; 2009) recent argument(s) for probabilism as our point of departure, we propose a new way of grounding formal, synchronic, epistemic coherence requirements for (opinionated) full

Belief, Credence, and Pragmatic Encroachment

This paper compares two alternative explanations of pragmatic encroachment on knowledge (i.e., the claim that whether an agent knows that p can depend on pragmatic factors). After reviewing the

Measuring the overall incoherence of credence functions

It is argued that one particular Dutch book measure and a corresponding distance measure are particularly well suited for capturing the overall degree of incoherence of a credence function.

On Inductive Logic

Among the various meanings in which the word 'probability' is used in everyday language, in the discussion of scientists, and in the theories of probability, there are especially two which must be

Outright Belief

What is the relation between (a) “full” or “outright” belief and (b) the various levels of confidence that agents can have in the propositions that concern them? This paper argues for a new answer to

Reliability Theories of Justified Credence

Reliabilists hold that a belief is doxastically justified if and only if it is caused by a reliable process. But since such a process is one that tends to produce a high ratio of true to false