KNOWLEDGE AND COHERENCE Paul Thagard, Chris Eliasmith 知识与相干保罗Thagard，克里斯eliasmith.docVIP

下载本文档

5
0
约7.1万字
约 19页
2018-06-29 发布于福建
举报
版权申诉

KNOWLEDGE AND COHERENCE Paul Thagard, Chris Eliasmith 知识与相干保罗Thagard，克里斯eliasmith.doc

1、有哪些信誉好的足球投注网站（book118）网站文档一经付费（服务费），不意味着购买了该文档的版权，仅供个人/单位学习、研究之用，不得用于商业用途，未经授权，严禁复制、发行、汇编、翻译或者网络传播等，侵权必究。。
2、本站所有内容均由合作方或网友上传，本站不对文档的完整性、权威性及其观点立场正确性做任何保证或承诺！文档内容仅供研究参考，付费前请自行鉴别。如您付费，意味着您自己接受本站规则且自行承担风险，本站不退款、不进行额外附加服务；查看《如何避免下载的几个坑》。如果您已付费下载过本站文档，您可以点击这里二次下载。
3、如文档侵犯商业秘密、侵犯著作权、侵犯人身权等，请点击“版权申诉”（推荐），也可以打举报电话：400-050-0827(电话支持时间：9:00-18:30)。
4、该文档为VIP文档，如果想要下载，成为VIP会员后，下载免费。
5、成为VIP后，下载本文档将扣除1次下载权益。下载后，不支持退款、换文档。如有疑问请联系我们。
6、成为VIP后，您将拥有八大权益，权益包括：VIP文档下载权益、阅读免打扰、文档格式转换、高级专利检索、专属身份标志、高级客服、多端互通、版权登记。
7、VIP文档为合作方或网友上传，每下载1次，网站将根据用户上传文档的质量评分、类型等，对文档贡献者给予高额补贴、流量扶持。如果你也想贡献VIP文档。上传文档

KNOWLEDGE AND COHERENCE Paul Thagard, Chris Eliasmith 知识与相干保罗Thagard，克里斯eliasmith

KNOWLEDGE AND COHERENCE Paul Thagard, Chris Eliasmith, Paul Rusnock, and Cameron Shelley Philosophy Department University of Waterloo Waterloo, Ontario, N2L 3G1 pthagard@watarts.uwaterloo.ca 1. Introduction Many contemporary philosophers favor coherence theories of knowledge (Bender 1989, BonJour 1985, Davidson 1986, Harman 1986, Lehrer 1990). But the nature of coherence is usually left vague, with no method provided for determining whether a belief should be accepted or rejected on the basis of its coherence or incoherence with other beliefs. Haacks (1993) explication of coherence relies largely on an analogy between epistemic justification and crossword puzzles. We show in this paper how epistemic coherence can be understood in terms of maximization of constraint satisfaction, in keeping with computational models that have had a substantial impact in cognitive science. A coherence problem can be defined in terms of a set of elements and sets of positive and negative constraints between pairs of those elements. Algorithms are available for computing coherence by determining how to accept and reject elements in a way that satisfies the most constraints. Knowledge involves at least five different kinds of coherence - explanatory, analogical, deductive, perceptual, and conceptual - each requiring different sorts of elements and constraints. After specifying the notion of coherence as constraint satisfaction in more detail, we show how explanatory coherence subsumes Susan Haacks recent foundherentist theory of knowledge. We show how her crossword puzzle analogy for epistemic justification can be interpreted in terms of explanatory coherence, and describe how her use of the analogy can be understood in terms of analogical coherence. We then give an account of deductive coherence, showing how the selection of mathematical axioms can be understood as a constraint satisfaction problem. Moreover, visual interpretation can also be understood in terms of satisfaction of mult