Moore’s Paradox, Introspection and Doxastic Logic

Thought: A Journal of Philosophy 4 (4):215-227 (2015)
  Copy   BIBTEX

Abstract

An analysis of Moore's paradox is given in doxastic logic. Logics arising from formalizations of various introspective principles are compared; one logic, K5c, emerges as privileged in the sense that it is the weakest to avoid Moorean belief. Moreover it has other attractive properties, one of which is that it can be justified solely in terms of avoiding false belief. Introspection is therefore revealed as less relevant to the Moorean problem than first appears

Other Versions

No versions found

Links

PhilArchive

External links

Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server

Through your library

Similar books and articles

Moore's many paradoxes.Mitchell S. Green - 1999 - Philosophical Papers 28 (2):97-109.
Shoemaker, self-blindness and Moore's paradox.Amy Kind - 2003 - Philosophical Quarterly 53 (210):39-48.
Epistemic Logic and Epistemology.Wesley H. Holliday - 2018 - In Sven Ove Hansson Vincent F. Hendricks, Handbook of Formal Philosophy. Springer. pp. 351-369.
Moore’s Paradoxes and Conscious Belief.John Nicholas Williams - 2006 - Philosophical Studies 127 (3):383-414.
The incorporation of Moorean type information by introspective agents.Jiahong Guo - 2009 - Frontiers of Philosophy in China 4 (3):470-482.

Analytics

Added to PP
2015-09-23

Downloads
183 (#221,830)

6 months
28 (#329,238)

Historical graph of downloads
How can I increase my downloads?

Author's Profile

Adam Rieger
University of Glasgow

References found in this work

Knowledge and belief.Jaakko Hintikka - 1962 - Ithaca, N.Y.,: Cornell University Press.
Modal Logic: An Introduction.Brian F. Chellas - 1980 - New York: Cambridge University Press.
Blindspots.Roy Sorenson - 1988 - New York: Oxford University Press.
Blindspots.Roy Sorensen - 1990 - Mind 99 (393):137-140.

View all 17 references / Add more references