Two flaws concerning belief accounts of implicit biases

Philosophical Psychology 31 (3):352-367 (2018)
  Copy   BIBTEX

Abstract

The current scientific discourse offers two opposing viewpoints about the roots of implicit biases: are they belief states or subdoxastic attitudes? The goal of this paper is to show that belief accounts of implicit biases are too demanding and lack a satisfying reasoning theory. Firstly, I will outline the concept of attitude and its relation to implicit biases. Next, I will briefly outline Mendelbaum’s view, who gives a paradigmatic example of a belief account of implicit biases. Afterward, I will concern two flaws and discuss them in more detail. This shows that all current belief accounts of implicit biases do not emphasize these critical points enough, which makes them unsatisfying.

Links

PhilArchive



    Upload a copy of this work     Papers currently archived: 92,197

External links

Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server

Through your library

Similar books and articles

Implicit Bias, Moods, and Moral Responsibility.Alex Madva - 2017 - Pacific Philosophical Quarterly 99 (S1):53-78.
Attributionism and Moral Responsibility for Implicit Bias.Michael Brownstein - 2016 - Review of Philosophy and Psychology 7 (4):765-786.
Accessibilism and the Challenge from Implicit Bias.Katherine Puddifoot - 2015 - Pacific Philosophical Quarterly 96 (3):421-434.
Implicit attitudes and implicit prejudices.René Baston & Gottfried Vosgerau - 2016 - Philosophical Psychology 29 (6):889-903.
Responsibility for Implicit Bias.Jules Holroyd - 2012 - Journal of Social Philosophy 43 (3):274-306.
What is implicit bias?Jules Holroyd, Robin Scaife & Tom Stafford - 2017 - Philosophy Compass 12 (10):e12437.

Analytics

Added to PP
2018-01-05

Downloads
81 (#207,736)

6 months
11 (#243,798)

Historical graph of downloads
How can I increase my downloads?

Author's Profile

René Baston
Heinrich Heine University Düsseldorf