Epistemologia computacional: uma provocação
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.51359/2357-9986.2019.248089Keywords:
Computational epistemology, naturalized epistemology, socialepistemology, bayesian epistemology, epistemic rationality. nonmonoto-nic logicAbstract
This paper is about the use of computer simulations in Epistemology (Com-putational Epistemology). The goal of the paper is to ground and discuss theidea of a Computational Epistemology, and to present an example of studyin this field. In the Introduction, I discuss the most common objections tothe methods of Traditional Epistemology and to Quine’s Naturalized Episte-mology. I argue that Computation Epistemology is not subject to any of the-se objections. In Section 1, I review the literature on Computational Episte-mology (both in individualistic Epistemology and in Social Epistemology)and discuss the general structure of these studies. In Section 2, I presentsome results of my PhD dissertation on Computational Epistemology.References
ANGERE, Staffan. The defeasible nature of coherentist justification. Synthese, v. 157, p. 321-335, 2007.
BAUMGAERTNER, Bert. Yes, no, maybe so: a veritistic approach to echo chambers using a trichotomous belief model. Synthese, v. 191, n. 11, p. 2549-2569, 2014.
BLOWN, Peter; BUCKWALTER, Wesley; TURRI, John. Gettier Cases: A Taxonomy. In: BORGES, R. et al. (eds.). Explaining Knowledge: new essays on the Gettier problem. Nova Iorque: Oxford University Press, 2018.
BYRNE, Ruth. Suppressing valid inferences with conditionals. Cognition, v. 31, p. 61-83, 1989.
COMESAÑA, Juan. Unsafe knowledge. Synthese, v. 146, n. 3, p. 395-404, 2005
CROSSCOMBE, Michael; LAWRY, Jonathan. A model of multi-agent consensus for vague and uncertain beliefs. Adaptive Behavior, v. 24, n. 4, p. 249-260, 2016.
CUMMINS, Robert. Reflection on reflective equilibrium. In: DEPAUL, M.; RAMSEY, W. (eds.). Rethinking intuition, Lanham: Rowman & Littlefield, p. 113-128, 1998.
DANTAS, Danilo. How to (blind)spot the truth. No prelo. Disponível em: .
DANTAS, Danilo. No rationality through brute-force. Philosophy South (Filosofia Unisinos), v. 18, n. 3, p. 197-200, 2017.
DANTAS, Danilo. Almost ideal: Computational Epistemology and the limits of rationality for finite reasoners. Tese (Doutorado em Filosofia) -University of California, Davis, 2016.
DOUVEN, Igor. Computational models in Social Epistemology. In:FRICKER, M. et al (eds.). The Routledge handbook of Social Epistemology. Nova Iorque: Routledge, p. 457-465, 2020.
DOUVEN, Igor. Inference to the best explanation, Dutch books, and inaccuracy minimisation. The Philosophical Quarterly, v. 63, n. 252, p. 428-444, 2013.
DOUVEN, Igor. Simulating peer disagreements. Studies in History and Philosophy of Science, 41, n.2, p. 148-157, 2010.
FOLEY, Richard. Quine and Naturalized Epistemology. Midwest Studies in Philosophy, v. 19, p. 243-260, 1994.
FRANKFURT, Harry. Sobre falar merda. Rio de Janeiro: Editora Intrínseca Ltda, 2005.
GLASS, David. Coherence, explanation, and hypothesis selection. The British Journal for the Philosophy of Science, axy063, 2018.
GLASS, David. Inference to the best explanation: does it track truth? Synthese, v. 185, n. 3, p, 411-427, 2012.
GLASS, David. Coherence, explanation and Bayesian networks. In: O’Neill, M. et al. (eds.). Artificial intelligence and cognitive science. Berlin: Springer, p. 177–182, 2002.
GOLDMAN, Alvin. Knowledge in a social world. Clarendon Press, 1999.
GRIM, Patrick; SINGER, Daniel. Computational Philosophy. In: ZALTA, E. (ed.). The Stanford encyclopedia of Philosophy, 2020. Disponível em: .
HAHN, Ulrike; HANSEN, Jens; OLSSON, Erik. Truth tracking performance of social networks: how connectivity and clustering can make groups less competent. Synthese, v. 197, n. 4, p. 1511–1541, 2018.
HEGSELMANN, Rainer; KRAUSE, Ulrich. Opinion dynamics and bounded confidence: models, analysis, and simulations. Journal of Artificial Societies and Social Simulation, v. 5, n. 3, 2002. Disponível em: .
HEGSELMANN, Rainer; KRAUSE, Ulrich. Truth and cognitive division of labor: first steps towards a computer aided Social Epistemology. Journal of Artificial Societies and Social Simulation, v. 9, n. 3, 2006. Disponível em: .
HERBRANSON, Walter; SCHROEDER, Julia. Are birds smarter than mathematicians? Pigeons (Columba livia) perform optimally on a version of the Monty Hall Dilemma. Journal of Comparative Psychology, v. 124, n. 1, p. 1-13, 2010.
KAHNEMAN, Daniel. Rápido e devagar: duas formas de pensar. São Paulo: Objetiva, 2012.
KIM, Jaegwon. What is ‘Naturalized Epistemology’? Philosophical Perspectives, v. 2, p. 381-405, 1988.
KIM, Minsun; YUAN, Yuan. No cross-cultural differences in the Gettier car case intuition: a replication study of Weinberg et al. 2001, Episteme, v. 12, n. 3, p. 355-361, 2015.
KNOBE, Joshua; NICHOLS, Shaun. Experimental Philosophy. In: ZALTA, E. (ed.). The Stanford encyclopedia of Philosophy, 2017. Disponível em: .
KORNBLITH, Hilary. Knowledge and its place in nature. Nova Iorque: Oxford University Press, 2002.
OLSSON, Eric. A simulation approach to veritistic social epistemology. Episteme, v. 8, n 2, p. 127-143, 2011.
OLSSON, Eric. (2013). A bayesian simulation model of group deliberation and polarization. In: ZENKER, F. (ed.). Bayesian argumentation. Nova Iorque: Springer, p. 113–134, 2013.
OLSSON, Eric. What is the problem of coherence and truth? Journal of Philosophy, v. 99, p. 246-272, 2002.
PALLAVICINI, Josefine; HALLSSON, Bjørn; KAPPEL, Klemens. Polarization in groups of Bayesian agents. Synthese, 2018.
PEARL, Judea. Probabilistic reasoning in intelligent systems: networks of plausible inference, São Francisco: Morgan Kaufmann Publishers Inc, 1988.
PEARL, Judea. Fusion, propagation, and structuring in belief networks. Artificial Intelligence, v. 29, n. 3, p. 241-288, 1986.
POLLOCK, John. Procedural Epistemology: at the interface of Philosophy and AI. In: GRECO, J.; SOSA, E. (eds.). The Blackwell Guide to Epistemology. Nova Iorque: Blackwell Publishing, p. 383-414, 1999.
POLLOCK, John. Cognitive carpentry: A blueprint for how to build a person. Cambridge: The MIT Press, 1995.
POLLOCK, John. How to build a person: a prolegomenon. Cambridge: The MIT Press, 1989.
QUINE, W. V. O. Reply to Morton White. In: SCHILPP, P.; HAHN, L. (eds.). The Philosophy of W. V. Quine. Chicago: Library of Living Philosophers, v. 18, p. 663-665, 1986.
QUINE, W. V. O. A Epistemologia Naturalizada (trad. Carrilho, M.), 1969. In: CARRILHO, M.; SÀÁGUA, J. (eds.). Epistemologia: posições e críticas. Lisboa: Fundação Gulbenkian, p. 267-298, 1991.
RUSSELL, Stuart; NORVIG, Peter. Artificial intelligence: a modern approach. Upper Saddle River: Prentice-Hall, 2010.
RYSIEW, Patrick. (2020), Naturalism in Epistemology. In: ZALTA, E. (ed.). The Stanford encyclopedia of Philosophy. URL = <https://plato.stanford.edu/archives/spr2020/entries/epistemologynaturalized/>, 2020.
SEYEDSAYAMDOST, Hamid. On normativity and epistemic intuitions: failure of replication. Episteme, v. 12, n. 1, p. 95-116, 2015.
SHAH, Nishi. How truth governs belief. The Philosophical Review, v. 112, n. 4, p. 447-482, 2003.
SIPSER, Michael. Introduction to the Theory of Computation. Stamford: Cengage Learning, 2012.
SOSA, Ernest. A defense of the use of intuitions in Philosophy. In: MURPHY, D.; BISHOP, M. (eds.). Stich and his critics, Malden: Wiley Blackwell, p. 101–112, 2009.
STENNING, Keith; VAN LAMBALGEN, Michiel. Human reasoning and Cognitive Science. Cambridge: The MIT Press, 2008.
STICH, Stephen. Naturalizing Epistemology: Quine, Simon and the prospects for Pragmatism. In: HOOKWAY, C.; PETERSON, D. (eds.). Philosophy and Cognitive Science. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, p. 1-17, 1993.
TITELBAUM, Michael. Fundamentals of Bayesian Epistemology. No prelo. Disponível em: .
TRPIN, Borut; PELLERT, Max. Inference to the best explanation in uncertain evidential situations. The British Journal for the Philosophy of Science, v. 70, n. 4, p. 977-1001, 2018.
WEINBERG, Jonathan; NICHOLS, Shaun; STICH, Stephen. Normativity and epistemic intuitions. Philosophical Topics, v. 29, n. 1, p. 429-460, 2001.
WILLIAMSON, Timothy. Knowledge and its Limits. Nova Iorque: Oxford University Press, 2000.
WINSBERG, Eric. Computer simulations in Science. In: ZALTA, E. (ed.). The Stanford encyclopedia of Philosophy. 2019. Disponível em: .
WRENN, Chase. Epistemology as Engeneering? Theoria, v. 72, n. 1, p. 60-79, 2006.
ZOLLMAN, Kevin. The communication structure of epistemic communities. Philosophy of Science, v. 74, n. 5, p. 574-587, 2007.
Downloads
Published
Issue
Section
License
A Revista Perspectiva Filosófica orienta seus procedimentos de gestão de artigos conforme as diretrizes básicas formuladas pelo Conselho Nacional de Desenvolvimento Científico e Tecnológico (CNPq). http://www.cnpq.br/web/guest/diretrizesAutores que publicam nesta revista concordam com os seguintes termos:
Os autores mantém os direitos autorais e concedem à revista o direito de primeira publicação, sendo o trabalho simultaneamente licenciado sob https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/deed.pt_BR que permite o compartilhamento do trabalho com reconhecimento da autoria e publicação inicial nesta revista.
Os autores têm autorização para assumir contratos adicionais separadamente, para distribuição não-exclusiva da versão do trabalho publicada nesta revista, com reconhecimento de autoria e publicação inicial nesta revista (Consultar http://opcit.eprints.org/oacitation-biblio.html).
Esta revista está licenciada com uma Licença Creative Commons Atribuição 4.0 Internacional.
