If justification flows bidirectionally between rules and particular inferences in equilibrium, then rule circularity and premise circularity are epistemically equivalent expressions of the same coherentist structure.
?Rate how convincing each reason is below to see the overall strength.
No one has weighed in yet. Be the first to share reasons for or against this statement.
Sign in or register to share your perspective on this statement.
General principles or patterns that apply broadly (like 'all living things need food'), as opposed to specific instances.
equilibrium(Game-theoretic analysis of revolt in networks)
A stable state configuration in which, given the thresholds and knowledge structure, the specified pattern of revolt is sustained because at least the threshold number of players revolt in every relevant state.
justification(Third condition of the tripartite account of knowledge)
The condition on a knower's belief that excludes mere luck — the belief must be held in a way that is appropriate or warranted, not merely accidentally correct.
premise circularity(Contrasted with rule circularity; described as potentially vicious.)
A form of circularity in which a conclusion appears as one of the premises of the argument supporting it.
rule circularity(Contrasted with premise circularity; suggested to be less obviously vicious.)
A form of circularity in which the inference rule used to license a conclusion is itself justified by an argument that employs that same rule.