The coherence objection to dream scepticism

IF 0.6 2区 哲学 0 PHILOSOPHY
Krasimira Filcheva
{"title":"The coherence objection to dream scepticism","authors":"Krasimira Filcheva","doi":"10.1111/phib.12266","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p>The dream sceptic argues that our ordinary beliefs are not justified because we cannot know that we have not always been dreaming. This is the <i>Always Dreaming Hypothesis (ADH)</i>. I develop the traditional coherence objection to dream scepticism and argue that the coherence objection can be reformulated in a way that makes it both plausible and defensible. Considerations about the incoherence of dreams can be given probabilistic expression in a way that shows <i>ADH</i> to be highly improbable. Given the evidence of coherence, <i>ADH</i> can be rationally rejected. Even if <i>ADH</i> is augmented with causal information sufficient to account for the coherence and order of conscious experience, the resulting dream scepticism would then reduce to a BIV-type scepticism and thus fail to possess independent sceptical force.</p>","PeriodicalId":45646,"journal":{"name":"Analytic Philosophy","volume":"64 4","pages":"409-421"},"PeriodicalIF":0.6000,"publicationDate":"2022-03-21","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Analytic Philosophy","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/phib.12266","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"哲学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"0","JCRName":"PHILOSOPHY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

The dream sceptic argues that our ordinary beliefs are not justified because we cannot know that we have not always been dreaming. This is the Always Dreaming Hypothesis (ADH). I develop the traditional coherence objection to dream scepticism and argue that the coherence objection can be reformulated in a way that makes it both plausible and defensible. Considerations about the incoherence of dreams can be given probabilistic expression in a way that shows ADH to be highly improbable. Given the evidence of coherence, ADH can be rationally rejected. Even if ADH is augmented with causal information sufficient to account for the coherence and order of conscious experience, the resulting dream scepticism would then reduce to a BIV-type scepticism and thus fail to possess independent sceptical force.

对梦怀疑主义的连贯性反对
梦想怀疑论者认为,我们的普通信念是不合理的,因为我们不知道我们并不总是在做梦。这就是常做梦假说(ADH)。我发展了传统的对梦怀疑主义的连贯性反对,并认为连贯性反对可以以一种既合理又站得住脚的方式重新表述。关于梦的不连贯性的考虑可以用一种概率表达的方式来表明ADH是极不可能的。鉴于相干性的证据,ADH可以被理性地拒绝。即使ADH增加了足够的因果信息来解释意识经验的连贯性和顺序,由此产生的梦怀疑主义也会减少为biv型怀疑主义,因此无法拥有独立的怀疑力量。
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
Analytic Philosophy
Analytic Philosophy PHILOSOPHY-
CiteScore
1.10
自引率
0.00%
发文量
34
×
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