Two reasons why epistemic reasons are not object-given reasons

In this paper I discuss two claims; the ?rst is the claim that state-given reasons for belief are of a radically different kind to object-given reasons for belief. The second is that, where this last claim is true, epistemic reasons are object-given reasons for belief (EOG). I argue that EOG has two implausible consequences: (i) that suspension of judgement can never be epistemically justi?ed, and (ii) that the reason that epistemically justi?es a belief that p can never be the reason for which one believes that p.