Dogmatism

In everyday use, dogmatism refers to a person's rigid epistemic attitude toward certain doctrines—whether religious or secular—where they hold specific beliefs as unquestionable and resist considering alternative perspectives or evidence. In philosophy, the term dogmatism is sometimes used in a similar way. For example, the dogmatism paradox of knowledge, famously described by Kripke and Harman, states that if we know that P, then we are justified in disregarding any future evidence against P; this is paradoxical because we can never be in a position to completely disregard future evidence. More commonly, however, dogmatism is known as a philosophical position opposed to skepticism. Both skeptics and dogmatists are interested in philosophical questions about reality, knowledge, morality, etc. One notable difference between them is that, whereas skeptics raise doubts, dogmatists defend positive answers to these questions, often in response to skeptical challenges. For example, consider the question of whether perceptual experience can justify beliefs about the external world. While skeptics doubt that it can, dogmatists—such as Moore, Pryor, and Huemer—argue that our perceptual experience can provide immediate, albeit defeasible, justification. Taken together, it could be said that a philosophical dogmatist is not dogmatic at all in the everyday sense.