Abstract
Crispin Wright has given an explanation of how a first time warrant can fall short of transmitting across a known entailment. Formal epistemologists have struggled to turn Wright's informal explanation into cogent Bayesian reasoning. In this paper, I analyse two Bayesian models of Wright's account respectively proposed by Samir Okasha and Jake Chandler. I argue that both formalizations are unsatisfactory for different reasons, and I lay down a third Bayesian model that appears to me to capture the valid kernel of Wright's explanation. After this, I consider a recent development in Wright's account of transmission failure. Wright suggests that his condition sufficient for transmission failure of first time warrant also suffices for transmission failure of supplementary warrant. I propose an interpretation of Wright's suggestion that shields it from objections. I then lay down a fourth Bayesian framework that provides a simplified model of the unified explanation of transmission failure envisaged by Wright.
| Original language | English |
|---|---|
| Pages (from-to) | 217-234 |
| Number of pages | 18 |
| Journal | Synthese |
| Volume | 184 |
| Issue number | 3 |
| DOIs | |
| Publication status | Published - Feb 2012 |
| Externally published | Yes |
Keywords
- Bayesianism
- Chandler
- Okasha
- Transmission failure
- Transmission of warrant
- Warrant
- Wright
Fingerprint
Dive into the research topics of 'Wright, Okasha and Chandler on transmission failure'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.Cite this
- APA
- Author
- BIBTEX
- Harvard
- Standard
- RIS
- Vancouver