{"id":916,"date":"2016-09-21T01:06:43","date_gmt":"2016-09-21T01:06:43","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/uni.hi.is\/esmari\/?page_id=916"},"modified":"2017-10-02T09:01:07","modified_gmt":"2017-10-02T09:01:07","slug":"v-kenningar-um-thekkingarfraedilega-lokun","status":"publish","type":"page","link":"https:\/\/uni.hi.is\/esmari\/kennsla\/inngangur-ad-thekkingarfraedi\/kennsluaaetlun-2017\/v-kenningar-um-thekkingarfraedilega-lokun\/","title":{"rendered":"V: Kenningar um \u00feekkingarfr\u00e6\u00f0ilegan r\u00f6kstu\u00f0ning"},"content":{"rendered":"<p>Eitt helsta umr\u00e6\u00f0uefni \u00feekkingarfr\u00e6\u00f0inga s\u00ed\u00f0ustu \u00e1ratugi er r\u00f6kstu\u00f0ningur (e. justification). Gettiervandinn s\u00fdnir a\u00f0 \u00fea\u00f0 a\u00f0 hafa sanna r\u00f6kstudda sko\u00f0un er ekki n\u00f3g til a\u00f0 hafa \u00feekkingu (\u00fe\u00f3 \u00fea\u00f0 geti enn veri\u00f0 nau\u00f0synlegt). Vi\u00f0br\u00f6g\u00f0in hafa \u00ed m\u00f6rgum tilfellum veri\u00f0 a\u00f0 sko\u00f0a betur r\u00f6kstu\u00f0ningshluta klass\u00edsku skilgreiningar \u00feekkingar og reyna a\u00f0 b\u00e6ta hann e\u00f0a styrkja. \u00cd \u00feessum hluta n\u00e1mskei\u00f0sins beinum vi\u00f0 sj\u00f3num a\u00f0 r\u00f6kstu\u00f0ningi og kenningum um hann. Vi\u00f0 munum fyrst og fremst fjalla um <em>utanhyggju<\/em> (e. externalism) og gagnr\u00fdni \u00e1 hana.<\/p>\n<p>Vi\u00f0 lesum eftirfarandi texta:<\/p>\n<ul>\n<li>Richard Feldman og Earl Conee \u201eEvidentialism\u201c, Alvin I. Goldman \u201eWhat Is Justified Belief?\u201c, Laurence BonJour \u201eExternalist Theories of Empirical Knowledge\u201c og Richard Fumerton \u201eExternalism and Skepticism\u201c.<\/li>\n<li>Nagel \u201eInternalism and externalism\u201c.<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<p>\u00cdtarefni:<\/p>\n<ul>\n<li><a href=\"http:\/\/plato.stanford.edu\/entries\/justep-intext\/\">Internalist vs. Externalist Conceptions of Epistemic Justification (SEP)<\/a>.<\/li>\n<li><a href=\"http:\/\/plato.stanford.edu\/entries\/reliabilism\/\">Reliabilist Epistemology (SEP)<\/a>.<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<p>Alvin Goldman b\u00fdr til hugtaki\u00f0 \u201einnanhyggja\u201c og r\u00e6\u00f0st svo gegn kenningunni (\u00ed grein sem vi\u00f0 lesum ekki). Hann n\u00e1lgast innanhyggjuna \u00fat fr\u00e1 spurningunni um \u00feekkingarfr\u00e6\u00f0ilegar skyldur. R\u00f6kin fyrir innanhyggju eru einhvern vegin svona a\u00f0 mati Goldman:<\/p>\n<ol>\n<li>Gerum r\u00e1\u00f0 fyrir a\u00f0 vi\u00f0 h\u00f6fum \u00feekkingarfr\u00e6\u00f0ilegar skyldur.<\/li>\n<li>Af \u00feessu lei\u00f0ir a\u00f0 vi\u00f0 ver\u00f0um a\u00f0 hafa a\u00f0gengilega <em>r\u00e9ttl\u00e6tingar\u00fe\u00e6tti<\/em> (e. justifiers \u2013 hugtak sem Goldman bj\u00f3 til).<\/li>\n<li>A\u00f0gengiskilyr\u00f0i\u00f0 lei\u00f0ir svo til innanhyggju, \u00fe.e. a\u00f0 vi\u00f0 \u00feurfum a\u00f0 hafa innri a\u00f0gang r\u00e9ttl\u00e6tingar\u00fe\u00e1ttum.<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n<p><strong>Richard Feldman og Earl Conee \u201eEvidentialism\u201c<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>\u00cd \u00feessum texta f\u00e6ra Feldman og Conee r\u00f6k fyrir kenningu um r\u00e9ttl\u00e6tingu sem \u00feeir telja auglj\u00f3slega r\u00e9tta. Kenninguna kalla \u00feeir\u00a0<em>s\u00f6nnunargagnahyggju<\/em> (e. evidentialism). \u00deeir m\u00e6ta s\u00ed\u00f0an nokkrum m\u00f3tb\u00e1rum til a\u00f0 standa uppi me\u00f0 sterka kenningu. Kenning \u00feeirra um \u00feekkingarfr\u00e6\u00f0ilegan r\u00f6kstu\u00f0ning (\u00deR) er \u00feessi (e. EJ: Epistemic Justification):<\/p>\n<ul>\n<li>\u00deR: Doxast\u00edsk afsta\u00f0a <em>D<\/em> til fullyr\u00f0ingar <em>f<\/em> er \u00feekkingarfr\u00e6\u00f0ilega r\u00f6kstudd fyrir S \u00e1 t\u00edma <em>t<\/em> ef og a\u00f0eins ef \u00fea\u00f0 a\u00f0 hafa <em>D<\/em> til <em>f<\/em> passar vi\u00f0 s\u00f6nnunarg\u00f6gn sem S hefur \u00e1 t\u00edma <em>t<\/em>.<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<p>Doxast\u00edsk afsta\u00f0a v\u00edsar \u00ed sko\u00f0anabundna afst\u00f6\u00f0u okkar til einhvers og er almennt tala\u00f0 um \u00ferj\u00e1r tegundir: a. \u00e9g held a\u00f0; b. \u00e9g held ekki a\u00f0; c. \u00e9g hvorki held n\u00e9 held ekki a\u00f0.<\/p>\n<p>\u00dea\u00f0 sem er \u00e1hugavert vi\u00f0 \u00feessa kenningu er s\u00fa sterka - raunar algera - tenging sem \u00feeir telja vera milli \u00feess a\u00f0 hafa s\u00f6nnunarg\u00f6gn (e. evidence) og \u00feess a\u00f0 hafa r\u00f6kstudda sko\u00f0un. Ma\u00f0ur hefur r\u00f6kstudda sko\u00f0un <em>ef og a\u00f0eins ef<\/em> ma\u00f0ur hefur s\u00f6nnunarg\u00f6gn sem sty\u00f0ja hana (\u00fea\u00f0 er \u00fev\u00ed b\u00e6\u00f0i nau\u00f0synlegt og n\u00e6gjanlegt a\u00f0 hafa s\u00f6nnunarg\u00f6gnin).<\/p>\n<p>Til a\u00f0 m\u00e6ta gagnr\u00fdni um a\u00f0 kenning \u00feeirra standist ekki vegna \u00feess a\u00f0 ekkert s\u00e9 sem bindi sko\u00f0unina \u00e1 fulln\u00e6gjandi h\u00e1tt vi\u00f0 s\u00f6nnunarg\u00f6gnin b\u00e6ta Feldman og Conee vi\u00f0 skilyr\u00f0i um <strong>g\u00f3\u00f0an grunn<\/strong>, GG (e. WF; well-foundedness).<\/p>\n<ul>\n<li>GG: Doxast\u00edsk afsta\u00f0a <em>D<\/em> sem S hefur \u00e1 t\u00edma <em>t<\/em> til fullyr\u00f0ingar <em>f<\/em> er \u00e1 g\u00f3\u00f0um grunni ef og a\u00f0eins ef\n<ol>\n<li>a\u00f0 hafa <em>D <\/em>til <em>f<\/em> er r\u00f6kstutt fyrir S \u00e1 t\u00edma <em>t<\/em>; og<\/li>\n<li>S hefur <em>D<\/em> til <em>f<\/em> \u00e1 grunni s\u00f6nnunargagnab\u00e1lks <em>e<\/em>, \u00feannig a\u00f0\n<ol>\n<li>S hefur <em>e<\/em> sem s\u00f6nnunarg\u00f6gn \u00e1 t\u00edma <em>t<\/em>;<\/li>\n<li>a\u00f0 hafa <em>D<\/em> til <em>f<\/em> passar vi\u00f0 <em>e<\/em>; og<\/li>\n<li>S hefur engan annan meira t\u00e6mandi b\u00e1lk s\u00f6nnunargagna <em>e\u2019<\/em> \u00e1 t\u00edma <em>t<\/em> \u00feannig a\u00f0 \u00fea\u00f0 a\u00f0 hafa <em>D<\/em> til <em>f<\/em> passi ekki vi\u00f0 <em>e\u2019<\/em>.<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<p>Athugi\u00f0 a\u00f0 ma\u00f0ur getur haft r\u00f6kstudda sko\u00f0un sem ekki er \u00e1 g\u00f3\u00f0um grunni.<\/p>\n<p>Kenning Feldman og Conee er innanhyggjukenning (e. internalism) um r\u00f6kstu\u00f0ning. Kenning Goldmans, sem er a\u00f0 m\u00f6rgu leyti l\u00edk kenningu Feldman og Conee, er hins vegar hrein utanhyggjukenning (e. externalism).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Alvin I. Goldman \u201eWhat Is Justified Belief?\u201c<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Goldman er einn \u00feekktasti utanhyggjukennismi\u00f0urinn um \u00feekkingarfr\u00e6\u00f0ilegan r\u00f6kstu\u00f0ning og \u00feessi grein, sem birtist 1976, olli straumhv\u00f6rfum \u00ed \u00feekkingarfr\u00e6\u00f0i (fyrst og fremst innan r\u00f6kgreiningarheimspeki). Samkv\u00e6mt honum er sko\u00f0un r\u00f6kstudd ef h\u00fan er fengin vi\u00f0 ferli sem alla jafna lei\u00f0ir til sannra sko\u00f0ana. Kenningin gengur undir nafninu <em>\u00e1rei\u00f0anleikahyggja<\/em> (e. reliabilism). Hann kallar kenninguna sj\u00e1lfur <em>s\u00f6gulega \u00e1rei\u00f0anleikahyggju<\/em> (e. historical reliabilism) en h\u00fan gengur almennt undir nafninu\u00a0<em>ferlis \u00e1rei\u00f0anleikahyggja<\/em> (e. process reliabilism).<\/p>\n<p>Kenninguna m\u00e1 or\u00f0a \u00e1 \u00feennan h\u00e1tt (\u00fat fr\u00e1 nau\u00f0synlegum og n\u00e6gjanlegum skilyr\u00f0um; ath. \u00feetta er ekki upprunlegt or\u00f0alag Goldmans):<\/p>\n<ul>\n<li>\u00dea\u00f0 er nau\u00f0synlega svo, fyrir s\u00e9rhverja sko\u00f0un <em>f<\/em>, <em>f<\/em> er r\u00f6kstudd ef og a\u00f0eins ef <em>f<\/em> var\u00f0 til vi\u00f0 \u00e1rei\u00f0anlegt hugr\u00e6nt ferli.<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<p>\u00dea\u00f0 sem gerir kenninguna a\u00f0 utanhyggjukenningu er s\u00e1 hluti hennar sem segir a\u00f0 s\u00e1 sem hefur sko\u00f0unina \u00feurfi ekki a\u00f0 hafa a\u00f0gang a\u00f0 r\u00f6kstu\u00f0ningnum til a\u00f0 sko\u00f0unin teljist r\u00f6kstudd. A\u00f0 sko\u00f0unin s\u00e9 fengin vi\u00f0 raunverulega \u00e1rei\u00f0anlegt ferli er n\u00e6gilegur r\u00f6kstu\u00f0ningur.<\/p>\n<p>Goldman n\u00e1lgast kenninguna \u00ed gegnum greiningu \u00e1 \u00f6\u00f0rum og eldri tilraunum til a\u00f0 skilgreina r\u00f6kstu\u00f0ning og \u00fe\u00e1 s\u00e9rstaklega tilraunir til a\u00f0 funna grundv\u00f6ll \u00feekkingar*. Hann hafnar \u00fdmsum kenningum og greinir vandann \u00feannig a\u00f0 alltaf vanti trausta tengingu sko\u00f0unar vi\u00f0 r\u00f6kstu\u00f0ning (ath. a\u00f0 kenning Feldman og Conee um r\u00f6kstu\u00f0ning uppfyllir ekki \u00feetta skilyr\u00f0i, ekki heldur me\u00f0 vi\u00f0b\u00f3tinni um g\u00f3\u00f0an grunn). Hann leggur \u00feess vegna fram kenningu um sko\u00f0anamyndandi ferli sem hefst me\u00f0 \u00edlagi (e. input) og l\u00fdkur me\u00f0 fr\u00e1lagi (e. output). Fr\u00e1lagi\u00f0 er sko\u00f0un. Ferli sem skilar \u00e1rei\u00f0anlegri sko\u00f0un er n\u00f3g fyrir \u00feekkingarfr\u00e6\u00f0ilega r\u00f6kstudda sko\u00f0un.<\/p>\n<p>Vandi Goldmans felst s\u00ed\u00f0an \u00ed \u00fev\u00ed a\u00f0 skilgreina hva\u00f0 ferli er og hversu \u00e1rei\u00f0anlegt \u00fea\u00f0 \u00feurfi a\u00f0 vera til a\u00f0 geta virka\u00f0 sem r\u00f6kstu\u00f0ningur.<\/p>\n<p>* \u00de\u00fd\u00f0ing \u00e1 kenningunum sem Goldman gagnr\u00fdnir og telur skorta orsakatengingu milli r\u00f6kstu\u00f0nings og sko\u00f0unar:<\/p>\n<ol>\n<li>Ef S hefur sko\u00f0un <em>f<\/em> \u00e1 <em>t<\/em>, og <em>f<\/em> er \u00f3vefengjanleg (e. indubitable) fyrir S \u00e1 <em>t<\/em>, \u00fe\u00e1 er sko\u00f0un S a\u00f0 <em>f<\/em> \u00e1 <em>t<\/em> r\u00f6kstudd.<\/li>\n<li>Ef S hefur sko\u00f0un <em>f<\/em> \u00e1 <em>t<\/em> og <em>f<\/em> er sj\u00e1lfgefin (auglj\u00f3s; e. self-evident), \u00fe\u00e1 er sko\u00f0un S a\u00f0 <em>f<\/em> \u00e1 <em>t<\/em> r\u00f6kstudd.<\/li>\n<li>Ef fullyr\u00f0ingin <em>f<\/em> er sj\u00e1lfv\u00edsbendandi (e. self-intimating), og <em>f<\/em> er s\u00f6nn fyrir S \u00e1 <em>t<\/em>, og S hefur sko\u00f0un <em>f<\/em> \u00e1 <em>t<\/em>, \u00fe\u00e1 er sko\u00f0un S a\u00f0 <em>f<\/em> \u00e1 <em>t<\/em> r\u00f6kstudd.\n<ol>\n<li><strong>Sj\u00e1lfv\u00edsbendingarskilyr\u00f0i<\/strong>: Fullyr\u00f0ingin <em>f<\/em> er sj\u00e1lfv\u00edsbendandi (e. self-intimating), ef og a\u00f0eins ef: nau\u00f0synlega svo, fyrir s\u00e9rhvert S og s\u00e9rhvert <em>t<\/em>, ef <em>f<\/em> er s\u00f6nn fyrir S \u00e1 <em>t<\/em>, \u00fe\u00e1 hefur S sko\u00f0un a\u00f0 <em>f<\/em> \u00e1 <em>t<\/em>.<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n<\/li>\n<li>Ef <em>f<\/em> er \u00f3lei\u00f0r\u00e9ttanleg (e. incorrigible) fullyr\u00f0ing, og S hefur sko\u00f0un <em>f<\/em> \u00e1 <em>t<\/em>, \u00fe\u00e1 er sko\u00f0un S a\u00f0 <em>f<\/em> \u00e1 t\u00edma <em>t<\/em> r\u00f6kstudd.\n<ol>\n<li><strong>\u00d3lei\u00f0r\u00e9ttanleikaskilyr\u00f0i<\/strong>: Fullyr\u00f0ing <em>f<\/em> er \u00f3lei\u00f0r\u00e9ttanleg ef og a\u00f0eins ef: nau\u00f0synlega svo, fyrir s\u00e9rhvert S og s\u00e9rhvern <em>t<\/em>, ef S hefur sko\u00f0un <em>f<\/em> \u00e1 <em>t<\/em>, \u00fe\u00e1 er <em>f<\/em> s\u00f6nn fyrir S \u00e1 <em>t<\/em>.<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n<p><strong>Laurence BonJour \u201eExternalist Theories of Empirical Knowledge\u201c<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>BonJour gagnr\u00fdnir utanhyggjukenningar sem bjarghyggjukenningar, \u00fe.e. sem kenningar sem eiga a\u00f0 leysa afturhvarfsvandann (hvernig veit \u00e9g a\u00f0 <em>f<\/em>? Vegna \u00feess a\u00f0 <em>g<\/em>. Hvernig veit \u00e9g a\u00f0 <em>g<\/em>? Vegna \u00feess a\u00f0 ... o.s.frv. \u00fear til vi\u00f0 finnum lei\u00f0 til a\u00f0 stoppa - og ef vi\u00f0 finnum ekki lei\u00f0 til a\u00f0 stoppa \u00fe\u00e1 tekur efahyggjan vi\u00f0). \u00dea\u00f0 er \u00fe\u00f3 vel h\u00e6gt a\u00f0 lesa BonJour sem almenna gagnr\u00fdni \u00e1 utanhyggjukenningar.<\/p>\n<p>S\u00fa utanhyggjukenning sem BonJour tekur fyrir er \u00e1rei\u00f0anleikahyggja (hann gagnr\u00fdnir \u00fatg\u00e1fu Armstrong en gagnr\u00fdnin \u00e1 allt eins vi\u00f0 um Goldman). Hann gengur \u00fat fr\u00e1 \u00fev\u00ed a\u00f0 til s\u00e9u fullkomlega \u00e1rei\u00f0anleg ferli sem lei\u00f0a til sannra sko\u00f0ana. A\u00f0 \u00fev\u00ed gefnu spyr hann: Erum vi\u00f0 \u00ed \u00feessum tilfellum me\u00f0 \u00feekkingu, l\u00edka \u00feegar ma\u00f0ur hefur ekki sj\u00e1lfur a\u00f0gengilegan r\u00f6kstu\u00f0ning fyrir s\u00ednum sko\u00f0unum?<\/p>\n<p>Hann gengur \u00fat fr\u00e1 d\u00e6mum um skyggnig\u00e1fu. D\u00e6migert BonJour d\u00e6mi er:<\/p>\n<ul>\n<li>Oddn\u00fd er fullkomlega skyggn (\u00feetta er sta\u00f0reynd um Oddn\u00fdju, en h\u00fan hefur \u00fer\u00e1tt fyrir \u00fea\u00f0 enga \u00e1st\u00e6\u00f0u til a\u00f0 \u00e6tla a\u00f0 h\u00fan s\u00e9 skyggn e\u00f0a a\u00f0 skyggnig\u00e1fa s\u00e9 yfirh\u00f6fu\u00f0 m\u00f6guleg). Dag einn <em>s\u00e9r<\/em> h\u00fan me\u00f0 skyggnig\u00e1fu sinni a\u00f0 Helgi er a\u00f0 spila \u00e1 t\u00f3nleikum \u00ed Genf og myndar s\u00e9r \u00f3sj\u00e1lfr\u00e1\u00f0a sko\u00f0un um a\u00f0 svo s\u00e9. Er sko\u00f0un Oddn\u00fdjar \u00feekkingarfr\u00e6\u00f0ilega r\u00f6kstudd?<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<p><strong>Richard Fumerton \u201eExternalism and Skepticism\u201c<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>H\u00e9r gagnr\u00fdnir Fumerton kenningar utanhyggjunnar \u00e1 forsendum frum-\/for-\u00feekkingarfr\u00e6\u00f0i (e. meta-epistemology). Frum\u00feekkingarfr\u00e6\u00f0i er ekki kenning um \u00feekkingu heldur f\u00e6st h\u00fan vi\u00f0 kenningar um kenningar \u00ed \u00feekkingarfr\u00e6\u00f0i. \u00cd \u00feessum texta spyr Fumerton um hvort utanhyggjunni takist a\u00f0 b\u00e6gja efahyggjunni fr\u00e1. Hann efast um a\u00f0 henni takist \u00fea\u00f0. \u00cd meginatri\u00f0um gengur gagnr\u00fdni hans \u00fat \u00e1 eftirfarandi:<\/p>\n<ul>\n<li>Ef vi\u00f0 gefum okkur a\u00f0 til s\u00e9u \u00e1rei\u00f0anleg sko\u00f0anamyndandi ferli \u00fe\u00e1 getum vi\u00f0 nota\u00f0 \u00feetta \u00e1rei\u00f0anlega ferli til a\u00f0 meta \u00e1rei\u00f0anleika sko\u00f0anamyndandi ferlis. En \u00feetta er \u00f3m\u00f6gulegt (r\u00e9tt eins og \u00fea\u00f0 er \u00f3m\u00f6gulegt a\u00f0 meta \u00e1rei\u00f0anleika stj\u00f6rnuspeki me\u00f0 \u00fev\u00ed a\u00f0 sp\u00e1 \u00ed stj\u00f6rnukort).<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>Eitt helsta umr\u00e6\u00f0uefni \u00feekkingarfr\u00e6\u00f0inga s\u00ed\u00f0ustu \u00e1ratugi er r\u00f6kstu\u00f0ningur (e. justification). Gettiervandinn s\u00fdnir a\u00f0 \u00fea\u00f0 a\u00f0 hafa sanna r\u00f6kstudda sko\u00f0un er ekki n\u00f3g til a\u00f0 hafa \u00feekkingu (\u00fe\u00f3 \u00fea\u00f0 geti enn veri\u00f0 nau\u00f0synlegt). Vi\u00f0br\u00f6g\u00f0in hafa \u00ed m\u00f6rgum tilfellum veri\u00f0 a\u00f0 sko\u00f0a &hellip; <a href=\"https:\/\/uni.hi.is\/esmari\/kennsla\/inngangur-ad-thekkingarfraedi\/kennsluaaetlun-2017\/v-kenningar-um-thekkingarfraedilega-lokun\/\">Halda \u00e1fram a\u00f0 lesa <span class=\"meta-nav\">&rarr;<\/span><\/a><\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":414,"featured_media":0,"parent":811,"menu_order":5,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"closed","template":"","meta":{"footnotes":""},"class_list":["post-916","page","type-page","status-publish","hentry"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/uni.hi.is\/esmari\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/pages\/916","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/uni.hi.is\/esmari\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/pages"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/uni.hi.is\/esmari\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/page"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/uni.hi.is\/esmari\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/414"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/uni.hi.is\/esmari\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=916"}],"version-history":[{"count":28,"href":"https:\/\/uni.hi.is\/esmari\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/pages\/916\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":1423,"href":"https:\/\/uni.hi.is\/esmari\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/pages\/916\/revisions\/1423"}],"up":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/uni.hi.is\/esmari\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/pages\/811"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/uni.hi.is\/esmari\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=916"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}