This paper compares within the MAS framework two separate threads in the formal study of epistemic change: belief revision and argumentation theories. Belief revision describes how an agent is supposed to change his own mind, while argumentation deals with persuasive strategies employed to change the mind of other agents. These are two sides (cognitive and social) of the same epistemic coin: ar...

Some propositions are not likely to be true overall, but if you believe them. Appealing the platitude that belief aims at truth, it has become increasingly popular defend view such epistemically rational believe. However, I argue this runs into trouble when we consider connection between what’s and practically do. conclude by discussing how rejecting bears on three other epistemological issues....

This article elaborates on foundational issues in the social sciences and their impact on the contemporary theory of belief revision. Recent work in the foundations of economics has focused on the role external social norms play in choice. Amartya Sen has argued in [Sen93] that the traditional rationalizability approach used in the theory of rational choice has serious problems accommodating th...

BACKGROUND In recent decades, two lines of research, phenomenographic and meta-cognitive, have examined students' approaches and epistemological beliefs about learning. To date there has been very little research describing the change in epistemological beliefs in European secondary students, or analysing interrelationships between epistemological beliefs and approaches in order to explain thei...

0039-3 doi:10 E-m So, the further I get with the description of the radical social constructionist programme and a particular version of postmodernism, coupled to the acid tools of critical discourse in the human sciences, themore nervous I get.Like all neuroses,mine is rooted in the problem of metaphor, that is, the problem of the relation of bodies and language. (Donna Haraway, 1991, p. 185, ...