Journal of Consciousness Studies 14 (11):61-82 (2007)
|Abstract||Neo-Cartesian approaches to belief place greater evidential weight on a subject's introspective judgments than do neo-behaviorist accounts. As a result, the two views differ on whether our absent-minded and weak-willed actions are guided by belief. I argue that simulationist accounts of the concept of belief are committed to neo-Cartesianism, and, though the conceptual and empirical issues that arise are inextricably intertwined, I discuss experimental results that should point theory-theorists in that direction as well. Belief is even less closely connected to behaviour than most contemporary functionalists allow.|
|Through your library||Configure|
Similar books and articles
R. Bogdan (ed.) (1986). Belief: Form, Content, and Function. Oxford University Press.
Anthony Robert Booth & Rik Peels (2010). Why Responsible Belief is Blameless Belief. Journal of Philosophy 107 (5):257-265.
Michael Bergmann (2006). Epistemic Circularity and Common Sense: A Reply to Reed. Philosophy and Phenomenological Research 73 (1):198–207.
J. J. MacIntosh (1994). Belief-in Revisited: A Reply to Williams. Religious Studies 30 (4):487 - 503.
David Hunter (2011). Alienated Belief. Dialectica 65 (2):221-240.
Eric Schwitzgebel (2012). Mad Belief? Neuroethics 5 (1):13-17.
Derek A. McDougall (1972). Religious Belief and Philosophical Analysis. Mind 81 (324):519-532.
John Cottingham (2009). Why Believe? Continuum.
Raul Hakli (2007). On the Possibility of Group Knowledge Without Belief. Social Epistemology 21 (3):249 – 266.
Daniel Whiting (2012). Does Belief Aim (Only) at the Truth? Pacific Philosophical Quarterly 93 (2):279-300.
Added to index2009-01-28
Total downloads102 ( #6,127 of 556,895 )
Recent downloads (6 months)8 ( #9,676 of 556,895 )
How can I increase my downloads?