Mystery and the evidential impact of unexplainables

Episteme 15 (4):463-475 (2018)
  Copy   BIBTEX

Abstract

How should the information that a proposition p is a mystery impact your credence in p? To answer this question, we first provide a taxonomy of mysteries; then, we develop a test to distinguish two types of mysteries. When faced with mysteries of the first type, rational epistemic agents should lower their credence in p upon learning that p is a mystery. The same information should not impact agents’ credence in p, when they face mysteries of the second type. Our account of mystery complements existing explications of abduction. We illustrate its significance by examining the mystery of consciousness.

Other Versions

No versions found

Links

PhilArchive



    Upload a copy of this work     Papers currently archived: 100,937

External links

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

Through your library

Analytics

Added to PP
2016-03-04

Downloads
246 (#107,285)

6 months
28 (#120,296)

Historical graph of downloads
How can I increase my downloads?

Author Profiles

Matteo Colombo
Tilburg University
Dominik Klein
Utrecht University

References found in this work

Two Dogmas of Empiricism.W. Quine - 1951 - [Longmans, Green].
Laws and symmetry.Bas C. Van Fraassen - 1989 - New York: Oxford University Press.
Two Dogmas of Empiricism.Willard V. O. Quine - 1951 - Philosophical Review 60 (1):20–43.
Bayesian Epistemology.Luc Bovens & Stephan Hartmann - 2003 - Oxford: Oxford University Press. Edited by Stephan Hartmann.
The Scientific Image.William Demopoulos & Bas C. van Fraassen - 1982 - Philosophical Review 91 (4):603.

View all 25 references / Add more references