Caie's Paradox of Credence - a podcast by MCMP Team

Hartry Field (NYU) gives a talk at the MCMP Colloquium (21 May, 2015) titled "Caie's Paradox of Credence". Abstract: Call a sentence ‘contradictory’ if it together with acceptable assumptions entails absurdities, and ‘paradoxical’ if it and its negation are both contradictory in this sense. There are plausible examples of paradoxical sentences: e.g. Liar sentences that assert their own untruth. What should our credence be in paradoxical sentences? There is a seemingly compelling argument that it should be interval-valued: in the case of non-empirically paradoxical sentences, our credence should be the full unit interval [0,1]. But Michael Caie has raised the issue of how to handle doxastic paradoxes. These paradoxes raise problems for the above view about appropriate credence. I’m not sure how best to deal with Caie’s examples; the talk will be a somewhat inconclusive exploration of this issue.

Further episodes of MCMP – Logic

Further podcasts by MCMP Team

Website of MCMP Team