David Bourget (Western Ontario)
David Chalmers (ANU, NYU)
Rafael De Clercq
Jack Alan Reynolds
Learn more about PhilPapers
Erkenntnis 67 (1):91 - 110 (2007)
This paper offers two new arguments for a version of Reflection, the principle that says, roughly, that if one knew now what one would believe in the future, one ought to believe it now. The most prominent existing argument for the principle is the coherence-based Dutch Strategy argument advanced by Bas van Fraassen (and others). My two arguments are quite different. The first is a truth-based argument. On the basis of two substantive premises, that people’s beliefs generally get better over time and that being a person requires having knowledge of this fact, it concludes that it is rational to treat your future selves as experts. The second argument is a transcendental one. Being a person requires being able to engage in plans and projects. But these cannot be meaningfully undertaken unless one has Reflection-like expectations about one’s future beliefs. Hence, satisfaction of Reflection is necessary for being a person. Together, the arguments show that satisfaction of Reflection is both rational and necessary for persons.
|Keywords||van Fraassen Reflection Belief|
|Categories||categorize this paper)|
Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server
Configure custom proxy (use this if your affiliation does not provide a proxy)
|Through your library|
References found in this work BETA
Michael Bratman (1987/1999). Intention, Plans, and Practical Reason. Center for the Study of Language and Information.
David Christensen (1991). Clever Bookies and Coherent Beliefs. Philosophical Review 100 (2):229-247.
David Phiroze Christensen (2004). Putting Logic in its Place: Formal Constraints on Rational Belief. Oxford University Press.
Donald Davidson (1984). Inquiries Into Truth And Interpretation. Oxford University Press.
Simon J. Evnine (2005). Containing Multitudes: Reflection, Expertise and Persons as Groups. Episteme 2 (1):57-64.
Citations of this work BETA
Stephanie Beardman (2013). A Non-Factualist Defense of the Reflection Principle. Synthese 190 (15):2981-2999.
Similar books and articles
Simon Evnine (2008). Epistemic Dimensions of Personhood. Oxford University Press.
Brad Armendt (1992). Dutch Strategies for Diachronic Rules: When Believers See the Sure Loss Coming. PSA: Proceedings of the Biennial Meeting of the Philosophy of Science Association 1992:217 - 229.
Brian Kierland, Bradley Monton & Samuel Ruhmkorff (2008). Avoiding Certain Frustration, Reflection, and the Cable Guy Paradox. Philosophical Studies 138 (3):317 - 333.
Jonathan Weisberg (2007). Conditionalization, Reflection, and Self-Knowledge. Philosophical Studies 135 (2):179-97.
J. Warren (2003). Sextus Empiricus and the Tripartition of Time. Phronesis 48 (4):313 - 343.
Bas C. van Fraassen (1995). Belief and the Problem of Ulysses and the Sirens. Philosophical Studies 77 (1):7-37.
Rachael Briggs (2009). Distorted Reflection. Philosophical Review 118 (1):59-85.
Matthias Hild (1998). The Coherence Argument Against Conditionalization. Synthese 115 (2):229-258.
Mitchell S. Green & Christopher R. Hitchcock (1994). Reflections on Reflection: Van Fraassen on Belief. Synthese 98 (2):297 - 324.
Added to index2009-01-28
Total downloads41 ( #40,516 of 1,098,955 )
Recent downloads (6 months)3 ( #114,620 of 1,098,955 )
How can I increase my downloads?