AGM, Ranking Theory, and the Many Ways to Cope with Examples

Abstract

The paper first explains how the ranking-theoretic belief change or conditionalization rules entail all of the standard AGM belief revision and contraction axioms. Those axioms have met a lot of objections and counter-examples, which thus extend to ranking theory as well. The paper argues for a paradigmatic set of cases that the counter-examples can be well accounted for with various pragmatic strategies while maintaining the axioms. So, one point of the paper is to save AGM belief revision theory as well as ranking theory. The other point, however, is to display how complex the pragmatic interaction of belief change and utterance meaning may be; it should be systematically and not only paradigmatically explored.

Mighty Belief Revision

“…There are important questions about the treatment of contraction and similar operations under a truthmaker approach, as well as about the matter of negation, but discussion of these will have to wait for another occasion.) 32 The central feature of the truthmaker framework is thus its use of a concept of relevant truthmaking, which makes it possible to capture various relationships of relevance between propositions. Relatedly, the distinctive features of the truthmaker-based approach to belief revision developed here can also be put in terms of relevance.…”