Elstein, D (2007) A new revisability paradox. Pacific Philosophical Quarterly, 88 (3). 308 - 318. ISSN 0279-0750
Abstract
In a recent article, Mark Colyvan has criticized Jerrold Katz's attempt to show that Quinean holism is self-refuting. Katz argued that a Quinean epistemology incorporating a principle of the universal revisability of beliefs would have to hold that that and other principles of the system were both revisable and unrevisable. Colyvan rejects Katz's argument for failing to take into account the logic of belief revision. But granting the terms of debate laid down by Colyvan, the universal revisability principle still commits Quineans to holding that one belief is both revisable and unrevisable: the belief that some beliefs are revisable
Metadata
Item Type: | Article |
---|---|
Authors/Creators: |
|
Copyright, Publisher and Additional Information: | This is the accepted version of the following article: Elstein, D (2007) A new revisability paradox. Pacific Philosophical Quarterly, 88 (3). 308 - 318, which has been published in final form at http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-0114.2007.00294.x © 2007 The Author. Uploaded in accordance with the publisher's self-archiving policy |
Keywords: | Paradox; revisability |
Dates: |
|
Institution: | The University of Leeds |
Academic Units: | The University of Leeds > Faculty of Arts, Humanities and Cultures (Leeds) > School of Philosophy, Religion and History of Science (Leeds) |
Depositing User: | Symplectic Publications |
Date Deposited: | 06 Oct 2014 08:34 |
Last Modified: | 16 Jan 2018 23:13 |
Published Version: | http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-0114.2007.00294.x |
Status: | Published |
Publisher: | Wiley |
Identification Number: | 10.1111/j.1468-0114.2007.00294.x |
Related URLs: | |
Open Archives Initiative ID (OAI ID): | oai:eprints.whiterose.ac.uk:80831 |