Graduate studies at Western
Philosophical Studies 159 (3):357-382 (2012)
|Abstract||It is commonplace to distinguish between propositional justification (having good reasons for believing p) and doxastic justification (believing p on the basis of those good reasons).One necessary requirement for bridging the gap between S’s merely having propositional justification that p and S’s having doxastic justification that p is that S base her belief that p on her reasons (propositional justification).A plausible suggestion for what it takes for S’s belief to be based on her reasons is that her reasons must contribute causally to S’s having that belief. Though this suggestion is plausible, causal accounts of the basing relation that have been proposed have not fared well. In particular, cases involving causal deviancy and cases involving over-determination have posed serious problems for causal accounts of the basing relation. Although previous causal accounts of the basing relation seem to fall before these problems, it is possible to construct an acceptable causal account of the basing relation. That is, it is possible to construct a causal account of the basing relation that not only fits our intuitions about doxastic justification in general, but also is not susceptible to the problems posed by causal deviancy and causal over-determination. The interventionist account of causation provides the tools for constructing such an account. My aim is to make use of the insights of the interventionist account of causation to develop and defend an adequate causal account of the basing relation.|
|Keywords||Justification Basing relation Causation Interventionist Causal deviancy|
|Categories||categorize this paper)|
|Through your library||Configure|
Similar books and articles
Hannah Tierney & Nicholas D. Smith (2012). Keith Lehrer on the Basing Relation. Philosophical Studies 161 (1):27-36.
Jonathan Kvanvig (1987). On Lemke's Defence of a Causal Basing Requirement. Analysis 47 (3):162 - 167.
John Turri (2010). On the Relationship Between Propositional and Doxastic Justification. Philosophy and Phenomenological Research 80 (2):312-326.
Peter Spirtes (2011). Intervention, Determinism, and the Causal Minimality Condition. Synthese 182 (3):335-347.
M. Gregory Oakes (2007). Can Indirect Causation Be Real? Metaphysica 8 (2):111-122.
Paul Silva (2013). How To Be Conservative: A Partial Defense of Epistemic Conservatism. Australasian Journal of Philosophy 91 (3):501-514.
Max Kistler (forthcoming). The Interventionist Account of Causation and Non-Causal Association Laws. Erkenntnis:1-20.
Oisín Deery (2013). Absences and Late Preemption. Theoria 79 (1):309-325.
Daniel M. Mittag (2002). On the Causal-Doxastic Theory of the Basing Relation. Canadian Journal of Philosophy 32 (4):543 - 559.
Frank Hofmann (2007). Causal Powers, Realization, and Mental Causation. Erkenntnis 67 (2):173 - 182.
Keith Allen Korcz (2000). The Causal-Doxastic Theory of the Basing Relation. Canadian Journal of Philosophy 30 (4):525-550.
Jason Taylor (2009). Dis-Unified Pluralist Accounts of Causation. Pacific Philosophical Quarterly 90 (3):388-401.
Added to index2011-02-21
Total downloads64 ( #17,364 of 739,303 )
Recent downloads (6 months)1 ( #61,243 of 739,303 )
How can I increase my downloads?