APNEA
发表于 2025-3-27 01:01:21
On The Structure of Rational Acceptance: Comments on Hawthorne and Bovens,represent valid argument forms constructed from rationally accepted formulas. This essay argues for this project by observing that a satisfactory solution to the lottery paradox and the paradox of the preface calls for a theory that both (i) offers the facilities to represent accepting less than cer
pessimism
发表于 2025-3-27 04:56:53
http://reply.papertrans.cn/95/9412/941157/941157_32.png
fetter
发表于 2025-3-27 09:01:25
http://reply.papertrans.cn/95/9412/941157/941157_33.png
notion
发表于 2025-3-27 12:44:14
http://reply.papertrans.cn/95/9412/941157/941157_34.png
Dysarthria
发表于 2025-3-27 15:27:50
http://reply.papertrans.cn/95/9412/941157/941157_35.png
Cultivate
发表于 2025-3-27 20:10:00
A Pragmatic Solution for the Paradox of Free Choice Permission,speaker (i) to obey certain Gricean maxims of conversation and (ii) to be competent on the deontic options, i.e. to know the valid obligations and permissions. The approach differs from other pragmatic approaches to free choice permission in giving a formally precise description of the class of infe
DEAF
发表于 2025-3-28 01:07:57
Book 2006se, which addresses contemporary issues in epistemic logic, belief revision, game and decision theory, rational agency, planning and theories of action. As such, the special section appeals to researchers from Computer Science, Game Theory, Ar- ?cial Intelligence, Philosophy, Knowledge Representatio
MUT
发表于 2025-3-28 02:54:42
http://reply.papertrans.cn/95/9412/941157/941157_38.png
抚慰
发表于 2025-3-28 06:25:35
classical and novel approaches to uncertainty, rationality, This book collects all the papers that appeared in 2005 in Kno- edge, Rationality and Action (KRA), a journal published as a s- cial section of Synthese, which addresses contemporary issues in epistemic logic, belief revision, game and deci
支形吊灯
发表于 2025-3-28 14:21:25
A Pragmatic Solution for the Paradox of Free Choice Permission,rences that can be derived based on these two assumptions. This formalization builds on work of Halpern and Moses (1984) on the concept of ‘only knowing’, generalized by Hoek et al., (1999, 2000), and Zimmermann’s (2000) approach to competence.