Rationally held ‘P, but I fully believe ~P and I am not equivocating’

Philosophical Studies 173 (2):309-313 (2016)
  Copy   BIBTEX

Abstract

One of Moore’s paradoxical sentence types is ‘P, but I believe ~P’. Mooreans have assumed that all tokens of that sentence type are absurd in some way: epistemically, pragmatically, semantically, or assertively. And then they proceed to debate what the absurdity really is. I argue that if one has the appropriate philosophical views, then one can rationally assert tokens of that sentence type, and one can be epistemically reasonable in the corresponding compound belief as well

Similar books and articles

Moore’s Paradox and the Priority of Belief Thesis.John N. Williams - 2013 - Philosophical Studies 165 (3):1117-1138.
Moore’s Paradoxes and Conscious Belief.John Nicholas Williams - 2006 - Philosophical Studies 127 (3):383-414.
Assertion and belief.Charles Sayward - 1966 - Philosophical Studies 17 (5):74 - 78.
Dubious assertions.David Sosa - 2008 - Philosophical Studies 146 (2):269 - 272.
Some Paradoxes of Counterprivacy.André Gombay - 1988 - Philosophy 63 (244):191 - 210.
Moore’s Paradox and Epistemic Justification.Robert Hambourger - 1984 - Philosophy Research Archives 10:1-12.
What Moore's Paradox Is About.Claudio Almeida - 2001 - Philosophy and Phenomenological Research 62 (1):33 - 58.
What Moore’s Paradox Is About.Claudio de Almeida - 2001 - Philosophy and Phenomenological Research 62 (1):33-58.

Analytics

Added to PP
2015-04-12

Downloads
921 (#14,562)

6 months
86 (#47,495)

Historical graph of downloads
How can I increase my downloads?