The defeasible nature of coherentist justification
2007 (English)In: Synthese, ISSN 0039-7857, E-ISSN 1573-0964, Vol. 157, no 3, 321-335 p.Article in journal (Refereed) Published
The impossibility results of Bovens and Hartmann (2003, Bayesian epistemology. Oxford: Clarendon Press) and Olsson (2005, Against coherence: Truth, probability and justification. Oxford: Oxford University Press.) show that the link between coherence and probability is not as strong as some have supposed. This paper is an attempt to bring out a way in which coherence reasoning nevertheless can be justified, based on the idea that, even if it does not provide an infallible guide to probability, it can give us an indication thereof. It is further shown that this actually is the case, for several of the coherence measures discussed in the literature so far. We also discuss how this affects the possibility to use coherence as a means of epistemic justification.
Place, publisher, year, edition, pages
2007. Vol. 157, no 3, 321-335 p.
coherence, probabilistic measures, impossibility results, generalized quantification
IdentifiersURN: urn:nbn:se:kth:diva-39428DOI: 10.1007/s11229-006-9058-4ISI: 000248426600005ScopusID: 2-s2.0-34547522465OAI: oai:DiVA.org:kth-39428DiVA: diva2:440455
Conference: Workshop Coherence 2006. Lund Univ, Lund, SWEDEN. MAR 03-04, 20062011-09-132011-09-092011-09-13Bibliographically approved