Supporters and underminers: reply to Chandler

Bradley, Richard (2016) Supporters and underminers: reply to Chandler. Mind . ISSN 0026-4423 (In Press)

PDF - Accepted Version Restricted to Repository staff only Download (255Kb)

• LSE expert's profile

Abstract

In ‘A Defence of the Ramsey Test’, I argued that the triviality results for the Ramsey Test hypothesis were misdirected and that we should instead reject one or more of the premises of these results. The Preservation condition, in particular, seemed doubtful to me and I offered two arguments for rejecting it; one which relied on a commutativity condition for belief revision and the other on a general version of Modus Ponens. In his discussion paper Chandler contests the significance of these results, though not the broader argument in favour of the Ramsey Test hypothesis. Since I concur that neither the commutativity condition nor Modus Ponens are incontestable and Chandler does not, I think, deny the need to restrict Preservation condition, I won’t have much to say about this part of his paper. Instead I will focus my remarks on the more positive parts of his paper and on the general issue of the suitability of the AGM framework for modelling defeasible reasoning.

Item Type:	Article
Official URL:	http://mind.oxfordjournals.org/
Additional Information:	© 2016 The Author
Library of Congress subject classification:	B Philosophy. Psychology. Religion > B Philosophy (General)
Sets:	Departments > Philosophy, Logic and Scientific Method
Date Deposited:	27 Jan 2016 14:25
URL:	http://eprints.lse.ac.uk/65171/

Actions (login required)

Record administration - authorised staff only