Closure

Shaun Nichols
{"title":"Closure","authors":"Shaun Nichols","doi":"10.1093/oso/9780198869153.003.0005","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"When people learn normative systems, they do so based on limited evidence. Many of the possible actions that are available to an agent have never been explicitly permitted or prohibited. But people will often need to figure out whether those unspecified actions are permitted or prohibited. How does a learner resolve this incompleteness? It seems that at least for many people in many contexts, there is an assumption that if an action-type is not expressly forbidden, then acts of that type are permitted. This “closure principle” is one of Liberty. But how might such a principle be acquired? This chapter argues that the statistical technique of pedagogical sampling provides an answer. If one is taught a rule system via a set of prohibitions, this provides reason to think that the set of actions in the domain that are not mentioned in the prohibitions are permitted.","PeriodicalId":383766,"journal":{"name":"Rational Rules","volume":"8 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2021-02-11","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Rational Rules","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1093/oso/9780198869153.003.0005","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

When people learn normative systems, they do so based on limited evidence. Many of the possible actions that are available to an agent have never been explicitly permitted or prohibited. But people will often need to figure out whether those unspecified actions are permitted or prohibited. How does a learner resolve this incompleteness? It seems that at least for many people in many contexts, there is an assumption that if an action-type is not expressly forbidden, then acts of that type are permitted. This “closure principle” is one of Liberty. But how might such a principle be acquired? This chapter argues that the statistical technique of pedagogical sampling provides an answer. If one is taught a rule system via a set of prohibitions, this provides reason to think that the set of actions in the domain that are not mentioned in the prohibitions are permitted.
关闭
当人们学习规范系统时,他们是基于有限的证据来学习的。代理人可以采取的许多可能的行动从未得到明确的允许或禁止。但人们通常需要弄清楚这些未指明的行为是允许的还是禁止的。学习者如何解决这种不完整性?似乎至少对很多人来说,在很多情况下,有一个假设,如果一种行为类型没有被明确禁止,那么这种类型的行为是允许的。这种“封闭原则”是自由主义的原则之一。但是怎样才能获得这样的原则呢?本章认为,教学抽样的统计技术提供了一个答案。如果一个人是通过一组禁止来学习规则系统的,那么这就提供了理由来认为禁止中没有提到的领域中的一组操作是允许的。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信