Social Epistemology 20 (1):79 – 91 (2006)
|Abstract||In this paper, I take a critical look at Adler's conceptual argument against doxastic voluntarism in his book, Belief's Own Ethics. In making his case, Adler defends evidentialism as the true version of how beliefs are acquired. That is, the will has no direct influence on belief. After a careful exposition of the argument itself, focus is placed on Adler's response to a particularly troubling objection to the form of evidentialism that results: Can evidentialism allow that doubt may be simultaneous with belief? It is in Adler's response that I find concessions that cripple his argument and offer new life to future defenses of doxastic voluntarism. In particular, his belief/confidence and weight of evidence/force of evidence distinctions result in inconsistency. If that inconsistency can be successfully demonstrated, the distinctions and the argument fall.|
|Keywords||No keywords specified (fix it)|
|Through your library||Configure|
Similar books and articles
Alfred R. Mele (2003). Jonathan Adler, Belief's Own Ethics. [REVIEW] Ethics 114 (1):156-158.
Scott F. Aikin (2006). Contrastive Self-Attribution of Belief. Social Epistemology 20 (1):93 – 103.
Andrew Reisner (forthcoming). Leaps of Knowledge. In Timothy Chan (ed.), The Aim of Belief. OUP.
Allen Wood (2008). The Duty to Believe According to the Evidence. International Journal for Philosophy of Religion 63 (1/3):7 - 24.
Jonathan E. Adler (1997). Constrained Belief and the Reactive Attitudes. Philosophy and Phenomenological Research 57 (4):891-905.
Nishi Shah (2006). A New Argument for Evidentialism. Philosophical Quarterly 56 (225):481–498.
Andrew Chignell, The Ethics of Belief. Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy.
J. Adler (2002). Belief's Own Ethics. MIT Press.
Paul Helm (1994). Belief Policies. Cambridge University Press.
Added to index2009-01-28
Total downloads40 ( #29,458 of 556,837 )
Recent downloads (6 months)1 ( #64,847 of 556,837 )
How can I increase my downloads?