Timeline for If knowledge is structural, does "confirmation bias" follow of necessity?
Current License: CC BY-SA 4.0
17 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Dec 6, 2021 at 18:22 | history | edited | Geoffrey Thomas♦ | CC BY-SA 4.0 |
'of' replaces 'as' in title line
|
| Dec 6, 2021 at 16:53 | comment | added | J D | Added epistemological tags since the question is primarily regarding knowledge. | |
| Dec 6, 2021 at 16:53 | history | edited | J D |
edited tags
|
|
| Dec 6, 2021 at 16:52 | answer | added | J D | timeline score: 1 | |
| Dec 4, 2021 at 3:00 | history | tweeted | twitter.com/StackPhilosophy/status/1466965683984547848 | ||
| Dec 1, 2021 at 12:00 | answer | added | Jencel | timeline score: 2 | |
| Nov 6, 2019 at 10:29 | history | edited | christo183 | CC BY-SA 4.0 |
added 4 characters in body
|
| Nov 6, 2019 at 10:00 | history | edited | christo183 | CC BY-SA 4.0 |
added 600 characters in body
|
| Nov 6, 2019 at 6:36 | comment | added | Conifold | Look at Mormann's recent survey Toward a Theory of the Pragmatic A Priori: From Carnap to Lewis and Beyond. Of course, Kuhn also comes to mind, and the elaboration on him by Lakatos. | |
| Nov 5, 2019 at 10:42 | comment | added | christo183 | @Conifold Thanks, I see. So Reichenbach and Friedman, any others? Did they take knowledge to be only declarative? Did anyone try to make a case for relativized a priori, or more likely a precursor concept, being somehow metaphysical, pre-linguistic or observer independent? | |
| Nov 5, 2019 at 9:35 | comment | added | Conifold | The evolution of a priori is a side issue. What I meant is that relativized a priori are exactly the "confirmation bias" and the "gravity" you are looking for. They are the structuring patterns/principles used to shape new knowledge, and change much slower than that which they shape. The stuff paradigms are made of, if you will. | |
| Nov 5, 2019 at 9:28 | comment | added | christo183 | @Conifold Fallibilism certainly shares a core conception of "knowledge" with the premise of this question. Your linked answer mentions how the notion of a priori has changed; what I'm asking about here could be said to be a principle or a mechanism that would act to limit the rate of change, if knowledge had mass this would be gravity. | |
| Nov 1, 2019 at 23:29 | comment | added | Conifold | Again this sounds very Kantian, the patterns we get out of experience are the ones we ourselves put into it. Making those patterns relative to the priors makes it neo-Kantian, but "confirmation bias" is not used this way. You can look at Friedman's relativized a priori, and fallibilistic apriorism generally. | |
| Nov 1, 2019 at 17:31 | answer | added | Ted Wrigley | timeline score: 1 | |
| Nov 1, 2019 at 12:45 | history | edited | christo183 | CC BY-SA 4.0 |
added 1 character in body
|
| Nov 1, 2019 at 12:20 | review | Close votes | |||
| Nov 9, 2019 at 9:40 | |||||
| Nov 1, 2019 at 11:19 | history | asked | christo183 | CC BY-SA 4.0 |