Graduate studies at Western
Analysis 66 (291):179–187 (2006)
|Abstract||How sensitive should you be to the testimony of others? You saw the car that caused an accident going through trafﬁc lights on the red; or so you thought. Should you revise your belief on discovering that the majority of bystanders, equally well-equipped, equally well-positioned and equally impartial, reported that it went through on the green? Or take another case. You believe that intelligent design is the best explanation for the order of the living universe. Should you revise that belief on ﬁnding that most other people, or at least most who by your own lights are as intelligent, informed and impartial as yourself, believe that evolutionary theory offers the better account? Should you do this, in particular, if your own personal sense of where the evidence points – like your own vivid memory of the car going through on the red – remains ﬁrmly on the side of intelligent design? Assume, to take a third case, that there is a matter of fact about whether abortion is right or wrong. You believe that it is wrong, having a ﬁrm picture of it as an act on a par with murder. Should you revise that belief on discovering that among those whom you regard as equally intelligent, informed and impartial, most believe that abortion is not wrong, or at least not wrong in the way that murder is wrong? Should you do this, in particular, if your own personal sense of abortion remains unchanged; it still seems to you to be a grievous wrong? Should you put aside your own sense of things as mistaken, in the way you might put aside your imagined memory of the car going through on the red, and decide to go along with the majority view?|
|Keywords||No keywords specified (fix it)|
|Categories||categorize this paper)|
|Through your library||Configure|
Similar books and articles
Charles W. Mills (2003). ``Heart'' Attack: A Critique of Jorge Garcia's Volitional Conception of Racism. [REVIEW] Journal of Ethics 7 (1):29-62.
J. Shearmur (2010). Steve Fuller and Intelligent Design. Philosophy of the Social Sciences 40 (3):433-445.
Emanuela Ceva & Federico Zuolo, A Matter of Respect. On the Relation Between the Majority and Minorities in a Democracy.
Jonathan Kvanvig (1986). How to Be a Reliabilist. American Philosophical Quarterly 23 (2):189 - 198.
Jeffrey Koperski (2003). Intelligent Design and the End of Science. American Catholic Philosophical Quarterly 77 (4):567-588.
John L. Pollock (1967). Non-Analytic Implication. Inquiry 10 (1-4):196 – 203.
Patrick A. Tully (2005). Victims of Abortion and “Victims” of Contraception. Journal of Philosophical Research 30:383-398.
Added to index2009-01-28
Total downloads37 ( #37,060 of 740,298 )
Recent downloads (6 months)2 ( #37,455 of 740,298 )
How can I increase my downloads?