Skip to main content
×
Home

META-INDUCTION IN EPISTEMIC NETWORKS AND THE SOCIAL SPREAD OF KNOWLEDGE

Abstract
Abstract

Indicators of the reliability of informants are essential for social learning in a society that is initially dominated by ignorance or superstition. Such reliability indicators should be based on meta-induction over records of truth-success. This is the major claim of this paper, and it is supported in two steps. (1) One needs a non-circular justification of the method of meta-induction, as compared to other (non-inductive) learning methods. An approach to this problem (a variant of Hume's problem) has been developed in earlier papers and is reported in section 2. It is based on the predictive optimality of meta-inductive learning, under the assumption that objective success records are globally available. (2) The rest of the paper develops an extension of this approach, so-called local meta-induction. Here individuals can access only success records of individuals in their immediate epistemic neighborhood. It is shown that local meta-inductive learning can spread reliable information over the entire population, and has clear advantages compared to success-independent social learning methods such as peer-imitation and authority-imitation.

Copyright
Corresponding author
gerhard.schurz@phil-fak.uni-duesseldorf.de
References
Hide All
Cesa-Bianchi N., and Lugosi G. 2006. Prediction, Learning, and Games. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Coady C. A. 1992. Testimony: A Philosophical Study. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Craig E. 1990. Knowledge and the State of Nature. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
DeGroot M. H. 1974. ‘Reaching Consensus’, Journal of the American Statistical Association, 69(345): 118–21.
DeMarzo P. M., Vayanos D., and Zwiebel J. 2003. ‘Persuasion Bias, Social Influence, and Uni-Dimensional Opinions.’ Quarterly Journal of Economics, 118: 900–68.
Douven I., and Rieger A. 2010. ‘Extending the Hegselmann-Krause Model I.’ Logic Journal of the IGPL, 18(2): 323–35.
Fricker E. 2002. ‘Trusting Others in the Sciences: A Priori or Warrant?Studies in the History and Philosophy of Science, 33A/2: 373–83.
Gigerenzer G., Todd P.K., and the ABC Research Group. 1999. Simple Heuristics that Make us Smart. New York: Oxford University Press.
Goldman A. 1999. Knowledge in a Social World. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Goldman A. 2001. ‘Experts: Which Ones Should You Trust?Philosophy and Phenomenological Research, 63(1): 85110.
Goldman A. 2006. ‘Social Epistemology, Theory of Evidence, and Intelligent Design: Deciding What to Teach.’ Southern Journal of Philosophy, 44: 122.
Golub B., and Jackson M. O. 2010. ‘Naive Learning in Social Networks and the Wisdom of Crowds.’ American Economic Journal: Microeconomics, 2(1): 112–49.
Hartmann S., Martini C., and Sprenger J. 2009. ‘Consensual Decision-Making among Epistemic Peers.’ Episteme, 6: 110–29.
Hegselmann R., and Krause U. 2005. ‘Opinion Dynamics Driven by Various Ways of Averaging.’ Computational Economics, 25(4): 381405.
Hegselmann R., and Krause U. 2009. ‘Deliberative Exchange, Truth, and Cognitive Division of Labour: A Low-Resolution Approach.’ Episteme, 6: 130–44.
Insole C. 2000. ‘Seeing off the Local Threat to Irreducible Knowledge by Testimony.’ Philosophical Quarterly, 50 (198): 4456.
Lackey J. 2006. ‘It Takes Two to Tango: Beyond Reductionism and Non-Reductionism.’ In Lackey and Sosa (2006: 160–89).
Lackey J. and Sosa E. (eds) 2006. The Epistemology of Testimony. Oxford: Clarendon Press.
Lehrer K., and Wagner C. 1981. Rational Consensus in Science and Society: A Philosophical and Mathematical Study. Dordrecht: Reidel.
Norton J. 2003. ‘A Material Theory of Induction.’ Philosophy of Science, 70: 647–70.
Pennock R. T. 2011. ‘Can't Philosophers Tell the Difference between Science and Religion? Demarcation Revisited.’ Synthese, 178(2): 177206.
Reichenbach H. 1949. The Theory of Probability. Berkeley-Los Angeles: University of California Press.
Rendell L. et al. 2010. ‘Why Copy Others? Insights from the Social Learning Strategies Tournament.’ Science, 328: 208–13.
Salmon W. C. 1957. ‘Should we Attempt to Justify Induction?Philosophical Studies, 8(3): 45–7.
Schurz G. 2008. ‘The Meta-Inductivist's Winning Strategy in the Prediction Game: A New Approach to Hume's Problem.’ Philosophy of Science, 75: 278305.
Schurz G. 2009a. ‘Meta-Induction and Social Epistemology: Computer Simulations of Prediction Games.’ Episteme, 6: 201–20.
Schurz G. 2009b. ‘Meliorative Reliabilist Epistemology: Where Externalism and Internalism Meet.’ Grazer Philosophische Studien, 79: 4162.
Schurz G. 2009c. ‘Meta-Induction: A Game-Theoretical Approach’, in Glymour C., Wang Wei, and Westerståhl D. (eds), Logic, Methodology and Philosophy of Science, pp. 241–66. London: College Publications.
Schurz G. 2011. ‘Truth-Conduciveness as the Primary Epistemic Justification of Normative Systems of Reasoning’, Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 34: 266–7.
Schurz G. 2012. ‘Meta-Induction and the Problem of Fundamental Disagreement.’ In Jäger C. and Löffler W. (eds), Epistemology: Contexts, Values, Disagreement. Frankfurt/M.: Ontos.
Zollmann K. 2012. ‘Social Network Structure and the Achievement of Consensus.’ Politics, Philosophy, and Economics, 11(1): 2644.
Recommend this journal

Email your librarian or administrator to recommend adding this journal to your organisation's collection.

Episteme
  • ISSN: 1742-3600
  • EISSN: 1750-0117
  • URL: /core/journals/episteme
Please enter your name
Please enter a valid email address
Who would you like to send this to? *
×

Metrics

Full text views

Total number of HTML views: 1
Total number of PDF views: 12 *
Loading metrics...

Abstract views

Total abstract views: 147 *
Loading metrics...

* Views captured on Cambridge Core between September 2016 - 24th November 2017. This data will be updated every 24 hours.