{"id":764,"date":"2010-11-04T18:38:50","date_gmt":"2010-11-04T18:38:50","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/www.illc.uva.nl\/lgc\/seminar\/?p=764"},"modified":"2010-11-10T20:07:53","modified_gmt":"2010-11-10T20:07:53","slug":"special-lira-session-on-epistemology-and-del-in-november-11","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/projects.illc.uva.nl\/lgc\/seminar\/2010\/11\/special-lira-session-on-epistemology-and-del-in-november-11\/","title":{"rendered":"Special LIRa Session on Epistemology and DEL in November 11"},"content":{"rendered":"<p><strong>Thursday November 11<\/strong> we will have a LIRa seminar special session on <strong>Epistemology and DEL<\/strong> in <strong>Groningen<\/strong>.<\/p>\n<p>The session will start at <strong>15:00 hrs<\/strong>, and will take place in Groningen at the\u00a0 Philosophy Department: <strong>Oude Boteringstraat 52, Room Alfa.<\/strong> The special session has the following program:<\/p>\n<table>\n<tbody>\n<tr>\n<td colspan=\"3\" align=\"center\"><\/td>\n<\/tr>\n<tr>\n<td>15:00 &#8211; 15:35<\/td>\n<td><\/td>\n<td><strong> <\/strong><strong>Wes Holliday<\/strong><\/td>\n<\/tr>\n<tr>\n<td><\/td>\n<td><\/td>\n<td><em> <\/em><em>(Stanford)<\/em><\/td>\n<\/tr>\n<tr>\n<td><\/td>\n<td><\/td>\n<td>Epistemic Closure and Epistemic Logic<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n<tr>\n<td colspan=\"3\">\n<blockquote><p>One of the central debates in epistemology in recent decades concerns  epistemic closure principles, such as the closure of knowledge under  known implication (the K axiom).\u00a0In this talk, I will introduce  epistemic-logical models of three influential theories of knowledge  according to which various epistemic closure principles do not hold:  the\u00a0relevant alternatives (RA) theory, the tracking theory, and the  safety theory of knowledge. The main result is a complete  characterization of the epistemic closure principles that hold according  to these formalized theories. Analysis of this result shows that two  parameters of an epistemological theory affect whether closure fails  according to the theory. Finally, extending the formal framework in the  style of dynamic epistemic logic,\u00a0I relate failures of closure in a  fixed context to failures of closure across context changes, as  suggested by contextualist versions of the RA and tracking theories.<\/p><\/blockquote>\n<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n<tr>\n<td colspan=\"3\"><\/td>\n<\/tr>\n<tr>\n<td>15:35 &#8211; 15:50<\/td>\n<td><\/td>\n<td>Questions and Discussion<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n<tr>\n<td>15:50 &#8211; 16:00<\/td>\n<td><\/td>\n<td>Coffee Break<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n<tr>\n<td colspan=\"3\" align=\"center\">\n<hr \/>\n<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n<tr>\n<td>16:00 &#8211; 16:35<\/td>\n<td><\/td>\n<td><strong>David Etlin<\/strong><strong><br \/>\n<\/strong><\/td>\n<\/tr>\n<tr>\n<td><\/td>\n<td><\/td>\n<td><em>(Groningen)<\/em><\/td>\n<\/tr>\n<tr>\n<td><\/td>\n<td><\/td>\n<td>Modals, Conditionals and Supposition<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n<tr>\n<td colspan=\"3\">\n<blockquote><p>TBA<\/p><\/blockquote>\n<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n<tr>\n<td colspan=\"3\"><\/td>\n<\/tr>\n<tr>\n<td>16:35 &#8211; 16:50<\/td>\n<td><\/td>\n<td>Questions and Discussion<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n<tr>\n<td>16:50 &#8211; 17:00<\/td>\n<td><\/td>\n<td>Coffee break<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n<tr>\n<td colspan=\"3\" align=\"center\">\n<hr \/>\n<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n<tr>\n<td>17:00 &#8211; 17:35<\/td>\n<td><\/td>\n<td><strong>Olivier Roy<br \/>\n<\/strong><\/td>\n<\/tr>\n<tr>\n<td><\/td>\n<td><\/td>\n<td><em> (Groningen)<\/em><em><br \/>\n<\/em><\/td>\n<\/tr>\n<tr>\n<td><\/td>\n<td><\/td>\n<td>Strategic Rationality and Responsiveness to Reasons<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n<tr>\n<td colspan=\"3\">\n<blockquote><p><span style=\"font-family: 'times new roman',fantasy;\"> <\/span><\/p>\n<div style=\"margin: 0px;\">\n<p><span style=\"font-size: x-small;\"><span style=\"white-space: pre-wrap;\"><span style=\"white-space: normal;\"> <\/span><\/span><\/span><span style=\"font-family: 'times new roman',fantasy;\"> <\/span><\/p>\n<div style=\"margin: 0px;\">\n<p><span style=\"font-size: small;\"><span style=\"white-space: pre-wrap;\"> <\/span><\/span><\/p>\n<p>In this paper we confront various notions of strategic rationality, that<br \/>\nis various choice rules for decision making in interaction, with the<br \/>\nidea that rationality consists, at least partly, in being responsive to<br \/>\nreasons. Our perspective is broadly Humean, and we are concerned with<br \/>\nsubjective-normative reasons: facts that the agents believe to hold and,<br \/>\nif they were the case, would promote the satisfaction of the agents&#8217;<br \/>\ndesires. From that point of view responsiveness to reasons amounts to<br \/>\n(in)variance under certain changes in the agents&#8217; beliefs about the<br \/>\ncontext of the game. We provide a general classification of well-known<br \/>\nnotions of strategic rationality in terms of how much, and to which type<br \/>\nof reasons they are responsive to.<br \/>\nNote: this is a different talk from the one Eric Pacuit recently gave at<br \/>\nthe GROLOG colloquium.<\/p>\n<\/div>\n<div style=\"margin: 0px;\">\n<p><span style=\"font-size: medium;\"><span style=\"white-space: pre-wrap;\"><span style=\"white-space: normal;\"> <\/span><\/span><\/span><\/p>\n<\/div>\n<\/div>\n<\/blockquote>\n<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n<tr>\n<td colspan=\"3\"><\/td>\n<\/tr>\n<tr>\n<td>17:35 &#8211; 17:50<\/td>\n<td><\/td>\n<td>Questions and Discussion<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n<tr>\n<td colspan=\"3\"><\/td>\n<\/tr>\n<tr>\n<td>17:50 &#8211; 18:00<\/td>\n<td><\/td>\n<td>General Discussion<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n<\/tbody>\n<\/table>\n<div id=\"_mcePaste\" style=\"position: absolute; left: -10000px; top: 207px; width: 1px; height: 1px; overflow: hidden;\">\n<table>\n<tbody>\n<tr>\n<td><em>(Groningen<\/em><em>)<\/em><\/td>\n<\/tr>\n<tr>\n<td><\/td>\n<\/tr>\n<\/tbody>\n<\/table>\n<\/div>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>Thursday November 11 we will have a LIRa seminar special session on Epistemology and DEL in Groningen.<br \/>\nThe session will start at 15:00 hrs, and will take place in Groningen at the\u00a0 Philosophy Department: Oude Boteringstraat 52, Room Alfa. The special session has the following program:<\/p>\n<p>15:00 &#8211; 15:35<\/p>\n<p> Wes Holliday<\/p>\n<p> (Stanford)<\/p>\n<p>Epistemic Closure and Epistemic Logic<\/p>\n<p>One of [&#8230;]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":11,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[4],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-764","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-events"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/projects.illc.uva.nl\/lgc\/seminar\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/764","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/projects.illc.uva.nl\/lgc\/seminar\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/projects.illc.uva.nl\/lgc\/seminar\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/projects.illc.uva.nl\/lgc\/seminar\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/11"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/projects.illc.uva.nl\/lgc\/seminar\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=764"}],"version-history":[{"count":16,"href":"https:\/\/projects.illc.uva.nl\/lgc\/seminar\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/764\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":781,"href":"https:\/\/projects.illc.uva.nl\/lgc\/seminar\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/764\/revisions\/781"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/projects.illc.uva.nl\/lgc\/seminar\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=764"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/projects.illc.uva.nl\/lgc\/seminar\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=764"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/projects.illc.uva.nl\/lgc\/seminar\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=764"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}