Why Be Disposed to Be Coherent?

Ethics 118 (3):437-463 (2008)
My subject is what I will call the “Myth of Formal Coherence.” In its normative telling, the Myth is that there are “requirements of formal coherence as such,” which demand just that our beliefs and intentions be formally coherent.1 Some examples are.
Keywords No keywords specified (fix it)
Categories (categorize this paper)
DOI 10.1086/528783
 Save to my reading list
Follow the author(s)
My bibliography
Export citation
Find it on Scholar
Edit this record
Mark as duplicate
Revision history Request removal from index
Download options
PhilPapers Archive

Upload a copy of this paper     Check publisher's policy on self-archival     Papers currently archived: 22,675
External links
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

No references found.

Add more references

Citations of this work BETA
Jonathan Way (2012). Explaining the Instrumental Principle. Australasian Journal of Philosophy 90 (3):487-506.
Niko Kolodny (2008). The Myth of Practical Consistency. European Journal of Philosophy 16 (3):366-402.
Errol Lord (2014). The Coherent and the Rational. Analytic Philosophy 54 (4):151-175.

View all 16 citations / Add more citations

Similar books and articles

Monthly downloads

Added to index


Total downloads

181 ( #21,084 of 2,064,976 )

Recent downloads (6 months)

15 ( #35,284 of 2,064,976 )

How can I increase my downloads?

My notes
Sign in to use this feature

Start a new thread
There  are no threads in this forum
Nothing in this forum yet.