研究目的
To solve the puzzle of transparency by explaining why the transition from a first-order judgment about the external world to a second-order judgment about one's own belief is rationally permissible, without relying on inner observation or monitoring capacities.
研究成果
The paper concludes that the transition from first-order to second-order judgments in the transparency approach is rationally permissible due to a justifying argument beginning with a premise about mental utterances. This avoids the pitfalls of Byrne's reliability-based account and Boyle's inner shift of attention, providing an inferential justification that aligns with the transparency approach's economy and avoids inner monitoring capacities.
研究不足
The paper is theoretical and philosophical, lacking empirical validation. It assumes the existence of mental utterances and relies on conceptual arguments that may not be universally accepted. The solution is specific to the transparency approach and may not address all objections or alternative theories of self-knowledge.
1：Experimental Design and Method Selection:
The paper employs a philosophical analysis and argumentation method, revisiting existing debates (Byrne and Boyle) and proposing a novel solution based on justifying arguments involving mental utterances. Theoretical models include the transparency approach and concepts from epistemology.
2：Sample Selection and Data Sources:
No empirical samples or datasets are used; the analysis is based on philosophical literature and logical reasoning.
3：List of Experimental Equipment and Materials:
No physical equipment or materials are mentioned; the study relies on conceptual tools and references to philosophical works.
4：Experimental Procedures and Operational Workflow:
The procedure involves outlining the puzzle, critiquing existing solutions (Byrne's rule-based approach and Boyle's reflective approach), and constructing a justifying argument that starts from premises about mental utterances to show rational permissibility.
5：Data Analysis Methods:
The analysis is qualitative, involving logical deduction, critique of arguments, and synthesis of ideas from referenced philosophers. No statistical techniques or software tools are used.
独家科研数据包，助您复现前沿成果，加速创新突破
获取完整内容
