Hostname: page-component-5447f9dfdb-6cxwp Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2025-07-28T10:05:58.292Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

EVIDENCE OF EVIDENCE IS EVIDENCE UNDER SCREENING-OFF

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  31 October 2013

William Roche
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

An important question in the current debate on the epistemic significance of peer disagreement is whether evidence of evidence is evidence. Fitelson argues (persuasively in my view) that, at least on some renderings of the thesis that evidence of evidence is evidence, there are cases where evidence of evidence is not evidence. I introduce a ‘screening-off’ condition and show that under this condition evidence of evidence is evidence.

Information

Type
Articles
Information
Episteme , Volume 11 , Issue 1 , March 2014 , pp. 119 - 124
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 2013 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Article purchase

Temporarily unavailable

References

Carnap, R. 1962. Logical Foundations of Probability, 2nd edn.Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Douven, I. 2011. ‘Further Results on the Intransitivity of Evidential Support.’ Review of Symbolic Logic, 4: 487–97.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Feldman, R. 2006. ‘Epistemological Puzzles about Disagreement.’ In Hetherington, S. (ed.), Epistemology Futures, pp. 216–36. Oxford: Clarendon.Google Scholar
Feldman, R.. 2007. ‘Reasonable Religious Disagreements.’ In Antony, L. (ed.), Philosophers without Gods: Meditations on Atheism and the Secular Life, pp. 194–214. Oxford: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Feldman, R.. 2009. ‘Evidentialism, Higher-Order Evidence, and Disagreement.’ Episteme, 6: 294–312.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fitelson, B. 2012. ‘Evidence of Evidence is not (necessarily) Evidence.’ Analysis, 72: 85–8.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kelly, T. 2010. ‘Peer Disagreement and Higher-order Evidence.’ In Feldman, R. and Warfield, T. (eds.), Disagreement, pp. 111–74. Oxford: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Roche, W. 2012a. ‘A Weaker Condition for Transitivity in Probabilistic Support.’ European Journal for Philosophy of Science, 2: 111–18.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Roche, W.. 2012b. ‘Transitivity and Intransitivity in Evidential Support: Some Further Results.’ Review of Symbolic Logic, 5: 259–68.Google Scholar
Roche, W. and Shogenji, T. forthcoming. ‘Confirmation, Transitivity, and Moore: The Screening-Off Approach.’ Philosophical Studies.Google Scholar
Shogenji, T. 2003. ‘A Condition for Transitivity in Probabilistic Support.’ British Journal for the Philosophy of Science, 54: 613–16.Google Scholar
Sober, E. 2009. ‘Absence of Evidence and Evidence of Absence: Evidential Transitivity in Connection with Fossils, Fishing, Fine-Tuning, and Firing Squads.’ Philosophical Studies, 143: 63–90.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Williamson, T. 2000. Knowledge and its Limits. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar