Knowledge in and out of Contrast

We report and discuss the results of a series of experiments that address contrast effect exhibited by folk judgments about knowledge ascriptions. The contrast effect, which was first reported by Schaffer and Knobe (2012), is an important aspect of our folk epistemology. However, there are competing...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:Noûs (Bloomington, Indiana) Indiana), 2016-03, Vol.50 (1), p.133-164
Hauptverfasser: Gerken, Mikkel, Beebe, James R.
Format: Artikel
Sprache:eng
Schlagworte:
Online-Zugang:Volltext
Tags: Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
container_end_page 164
container_issue 1
container_start_page 133
container_title Noûs (Bloomington, Indiana)
container_volume 50
creator Gerken, Mikkel
Beebe, James R.
description We report and discuss the results of a series of experiments that address contrast effect exhibited by folk judgments about knowledge ascriptions. The contrast effect, which was first reported by Schaffer and Knobe (2012), is an important aspect of our folk epistemology. However, there are competing theoretical accounts of it. We shed light on the various accounts by providing novel empirical data and theoretical considerations. Our key findings are, firstly, that belief ascriptions exhibit a similar contrast effect and, secondly, that the contrast effect is systematically sensitive to the content of what is in contrast. We argue that these data pose significant challenges to contrastivist accounts of the contrast effect. Furthermore, some of the data set provides, in conjunction with some non-empirical epistemological arguments, some limited evidence for what we call a focal bias account of the data (Gerken 2012, 2013). According to the focal bias account, the contrast effects arise at least in part because epistemically relevant facts are not always adequately processed when they are presented in certain ways.
doi_str_mv 10.1111/nous.12064
format Article
fullrecord <record><control><sourceid>jstor_proqu</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_journals_1758134770</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><jstor_id>43828960</jstor_id><sourcerecordid>43828960</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c4974-b469ee1170e91911ec630a38b8fc593b7bf9f37db519fbcf543f8abe624555233</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNp9kM1Lw0AQxRdRsFYv3oWANyF1J_t9lKKpGlpQi8clSXcltWbrbkLtf29qtEffZQ7zezOPh9A54BF0uq5dG0aQYE4P0AAolzHGXB6iAcaJiilP6DE6CWGJO0kpByh6rN1mZRZvJqrqKK8XkWubyNlo7OrG56E5RUc2XwVz9juHaH53-zKexNksvR_fZHFJlaBxQbkyBkBgo0ABmJITnBNZSFsyRQpRWGWJWBQMlC1KyyixMi9Ml4gxlhAyRJf93bV3n60JjV661tfdSw2CSSBUCNxRVz1VeheCN1avffWR-60GrHcN6F0D-qeBDoYe3lQrs_2H1NPZ_PnPc9F7lqFxfu-hRCZS8V2AuN9XoTFf-33u3zUXRDD9Ok11Osmm8JCBfiLfq-l0jA</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>1758134770</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Knowledge in and out of Contrast</title><source>Jstor Complete Legacy</source><source>Wiley Online Library Journals Frontfile Complete</source><creator>Gerken, Mikkel ; Beebe, James R.</creator><creatorcontrib>Gerken, Mikkel ; Beebe, James R.</creatorcontrib><description>We report and discuss the results of a series of experiments that address contrast effect exhibited by folk judgments about knowledge ascriptions. The contrast effect, which was first reported by Schaffer and Knobe (2012), is an important aspect of our folk epistemology. However, there are competing theoretical accounts of it. We shed light on the various accounts by providing novel empirical data and theoretical considerations. Our key findings are, firstly, that belief ascriptions exhibit a similar contrast effect and, secondly, that the contrast effect is systematically sensitive to the content of what is in contrast. We argue that these data pose significant challenges to contrastivist accounts of the contrast effect. Furthermore, some of the data set provides, in conjunction with some non-empirical epistemological arguments, some limited evidence for what we call a focal bias account of the data (Gerken 2012, 2013). According to the focal bias account, the contrast effects arise at least in part because epistemically relevant facts are not always adequately processed when they are presented in certain ways.</description><identifier>ISSN: 0029-4624</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1468-0068</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1111/nous.12064</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>Oxford: Blackwell Publishing Ltd</publisher><subject>Epistemology ; Knowledge ; Philosophy</subject><ispartof>Noûs (Bloomington, Indiana), 2016-03, Vol.50 (1), p.133-164</ispartof><rights>2016 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.</rights><rights>2014 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.</rights><rights>Copyright © 2016 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c4974-b469ee1170e91911ec630a38b8fc593b7bf9f37db519fbcf543f8abe624555233</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c4974-b469ee1170e91911ec630a38b8fc593b7bf9f37db519fbcf543f8abe624555233</cites></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktopdf>$$Uhttps://www.jstor.org/stable/pdf/43828960$$EPDF$$P50$$Gjstor$$H</linktopdf><linktohtml>$$Uhttps://www.jstor.org/stable/43828960$$EHTML$$P50$$Gjstor$$H</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>314,776,780,799,1411,27903,27904,45553,45554,57995,58228</link.rule.ids></links><search><creatorcontrib>Gerken, Mikkel</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Beebe, James R.</creatorcontrib><title>Knowledge in and out of Contrast</title><title>Noûs (Bloomington, Indiana)</title><addtitle>Noûs</addtitle><description>We report and discuss the results of a series of experiments that address contrast effect exhibited by folk judgments about knowledge ascriptions. The contrast effect, which was first reported by Schaffer and Knobe (2012), is an important aspect of our folk epistemology. However, there are competing theoretical accounts of it. We shed light on the various accounts by providing novel empirical data and theoretical considerations. Our key findings are, firstly, that belief ascriptions exhibit a similar contrast effect and, secondly, that the contrast effect is systematically sensitive to the content of what is in contrast. We argue that these data pose significant challenges to contrastivist accounts of the contrast effect. Furthermore, some of the data set provides, in conjunction with some non-empirical epistemological arguments, some limited evidence for what we call a focal bias account of the data (Gerken 2012, 2013). According to the focal bias account, the contrast effects arise at least in part because epistemically relevant facts are not always adequately processed when they are presented in certain ways.</description><subject>Epistemology</subject><subject>Knowledge</subject><subject>Philosophy</subject><issn>0029-4624</issn><issn>1468-0068</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2016</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><recordid>eNp9kM1Lw0AQxRdRsFYv3oWANyF1J_t9lKKpGlpQi8clSXcltWbrbkLtf29qtEffZQ7zezOPh9A54BF0uq5dG0aQYE4P0AAolzHGXB6iAcaJiilP6DE6CWGJO0kpByh6rN1mZRZvJqrqKK8XkWubyNlo7OrG56E5RUc2XwVz9juHaH53-zKexNksvR_fZHFJlaBxQbkyBkBgo0ABmJITnBNZSFsyRQpRWGWJWBQMlC1KyyixMi9Ml4gxlhAyRJf93bV3n60JjV661tfdSw2CSSBUCNxRVz1VeheCN1avffWR-60GrHcN6F0D-qeBDoYe3lQrs_2H1NPZ_PnPc9F7lqFxfu-hRCZS8V2AuN9XoTFf-33u3zUXRDD9Ok11Osmm8JCBfiLfq-l0jA</recordid><startdate>201603</startdate><enddate>201603</enddate><creator>Gerken, Mikkel</creator><creator>Beebe, James R.</creator><general>Blackwell Publishing Ltd</general><general>Wiley Blackwell</general><scope>BSCLL</scope><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope></search><sort><creationdate>201603</creationdate><title>Knowledge in and out of Contrast</title><author>Gerken, Mikkel ; Beebe, James R.</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c4974-b469ee1170e91911ec630a38b8fc593b7bf9f37db519fbcf543f8abe624555233</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2016</creationdate><topic>Epistemology</topic><topic>Knowledge</topic><topic>Philosophy</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Gerken, Mikkel</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Beebe, James R.</creatorcontrib><collection>Istex</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><jtitle>Noûs (Bloomington, Indiana)</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Gerken, Mikkel</au><au>Beebe, James R.</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Knowledge in and out of Contrast</atitle><jtitle>Noûs (Bloomington, Indiana)</jtitle><addtitle>Noûs</addtitle><date>2016-03</date><risdate>2016</risdate><volume>50</volume><issue>1</issue><spage>133</spage><epage>164</epage><pages>133-164</pages><issn>0029-4624</issn><eissn>1468-0068</eissn><abstract>We report and discuss the results of a series of experiments that address contrast effect exhibited by folk judgments about knowledge ascriptions. The contrast effect, which was first reported by Schaffer and Knobe (2012), is an important aspect of our folk epistemology. However, there are competing theoretical accounts of it. We shed light on the various accounts by providing novel empirical data and theoretical considerations. Our key findings are, firstly, that belief ascriptions exhibit a similar contrast effect and, secondly, that the contrast effect is systematically sensitive to the content of what is in contrast. We argue that these data pose significant challenges to contrastivist accounts of the contrast effect. Furthermore, some of the data set provides, in conjunction with some non-empirical epistemological arguments, some limited evidence for what we call a focal bias account of the data (Gerken 2012, 2013). According to the focal bias account, the contrast effects arise at least in part because epistemically relevant facts are not always adequately processed when they are presented in certain ways.</abstract><cop>Oxford</cop><pub>Blackwell Publishing Ltd</pub><doi>10.1111/nous.12064</doi><tpages>32</tpages></addata></record>
fulltext fulltext
identifier ISSN: 0029-4624
ispartof Noûs (Bloomington, Indiana), 2016-03, Vol.50 (1), p.133-164
issn 0029-4624
1468-0068
language eng
recordid cdi_proquest_journals_1758134770
source Jstor Complete Legacy; Wiley Online Library Journals Frontfile Complete
subjects Epistemology
Knowledge
Philosophy
title Knowledge in and out of Contrast
url https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-01-28T00%3A26%3A14IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-jstor_proqu&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Knowledge%20in%20and%20out%20of%20Contrast&rft.jtitle=No%C3%BBs%20(Bloomington,%20Indiana)&rft.au=Gerken,%20Mikkel&rft.date=2016-03&rft.volume=50&rft.issue=1&rft.spage=133&rft.epage=164&rft.pages=133-164&rft.issn=0029-4624&rft.eissn=1468-0068&rft_id=info:doi/10.1111/nous.12064&rft_dat=%3Cjstor_proqu%3E43828960%3C/jstor_proqu%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=1758134770&rft_id=info:pmid/&rft_jstor_id=43828960&rfr_iscdi=true