Doxastic coercion

Philosophical Quarterly 61 (244):537-557 (2011)
Abstract I examine ways in which belief can and cannot be coerced. Belief simply cannot be coerced in a way analogous to central cases of coerced action, for it cannot be coerced by threats which serve as genuine reasons for belief. But there are two other ways in which the concept of coercion can apply to belief. Belief can be indirectly coerced by threats which serve as reasons for acting in ways designed to bring about a belief, and it can be coercively compelled by threats which non-rationally cause belief. The former is often a necessary and epistemically acceptable feature of compulsory education, but the latter produces beliefs which even if true are epistemically problematic
Keywords coercion  belief  reasons
Categories
Options
 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: 5,679
External links
  • Through your library Configure

    Similar books and articles
    Elinor Mason (2012). Coercion and Integrity. In Mark Timmons (ed.), Oxford Studies in Normative Ethics 2. Oxford.
    Hannah Ginsborg (2006). Reasons for Belief. Philosophy and Phenomenological Research 72 (2):286–318.
    Joan McGregor (1988). PhilipS on Coerced Agreements. Law and Philosophy 7 (2):225 - 236.

    Analytics

    Monthly downloads

    Added to index

    2011-02-03

    Total downloads

    24 ( #51,635 of 549,088 )

    Recent downloads (6 months)

    1 ( #63,317 of 549,088 )

    How can I increase my downloads?


    My notes
    Sign in to use this feature


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

    Other forums