Titlebook: IFS; Conditionals, Belief William L. Harper,Robert Stalnaker,Glenn Pearce Book 1981 D. Reidel Publishing Company, Dordrecht, Holland 1981 J

縫紉

The Western Ontario Series in Philosophy of Sciencehttp://image.papertrans.cn/i/image/460267.jpg

synchronous

A Sketch of Some Recent Developments in the Theory of Conditionalsclassics, Stalnaker’s ‘A Theory of Conditionals’ and Lewis’ ‘Counterfactuals and Comparative Possibility’, together with Stalnaker’s new paper ‘A Defence of Conditional Excluded Middle’. These papers contrast sharply with the earlier work of Goodman, Chisholm, and others, which attested to the probl

把…比做

嚴(yán)重傷害

Counterfactuals and Comparative Possibilityal language by systematically specifying the conditions under which a modal sentence is true at a possible world. I hope to do the same for counterfactual conditionals. I write .□→. for the counterfactual conditional with antecedent . and consequent .. It may be read as ‘If it were the case that .,

Aromatic

A Defense of Conditional Excluded Middleewis,. John Pollock,. Brian Chellas,. and myself and Richmond Thomason. in order to focus on some small points of difference between the theory I favor and the others. I will sketch quickly and roughly the general ideas which lie behind all of these theories, and the common semantical framework in w

obviate

Sputum

Probabilities of Conditionals and Conditional Probabilitiessible to assert that . only if .(.) is sufficiently close to 1, where . is the probability function that represents his system of degrees of belief at the time. Assertability goes by subjective probability.

right-atrium

茁壯成長

PET-scan

Two Recent Theories of Conditionalsorlds (Stalnaker, ‘A Theory of Conditionals’, 1968, this volume, pp. 41–55; Lewis, ., 1973) and the other based on subjective conditional probabilities (Adams, ., 1975). The two accounts, I shall claim, have almost nothing in common, They do have a common logic within the domain on which they both p