Philosophical Papers 33 (3):309-328 (2004)

Authors
Damian Cox
Bond University
Michael Levine
University of Michigan, Ann Arbor
Abstract
This paper explores the grounds upon which moral judgment of a person's beliefs is properly made. The beliefs in question are non-moral beliefs and the objects of moral judgment are individual instances of believing. We argue that instances of believing may be morally wrong on any of three distinct grounds: (i) by constituting a moral hazard, (ii) by being the result of immoral inquiry, or (iii) by arising from vicious inner processes of belief formation. On this way of articulating the basis of moral judgment of belief it becomes clear that rational and epistemic norms do not exhaust the kinds of normative judgment properly made of a person's state of believing. We argue that there are instances of believing that are both rational and true and yet morally wrong
Keywords No keywords specified (fix it)
Categories (categorize this paper)
DOI 10.1080/05568640409485145
Options
Edit this record
Mark as duplicate
Export citation
Find it on Scholar
Request removal from index
Revision history

Download options

PhilArchive copy


Upload a copy of this paper     Check publisher's policy     Papers currently archived: 59,827
Through your library

References found in this work BETA

No references found.

Add more references

Citations of this work BETA

Epistemic Injustice and the Struggle for Recognition of Afro-Mexicans: A Model for Native Americans?Sergio A. Gallegos - 2018 - APA Newsletter on Native American and Indigenous Philosophy 18 (1):35-42.

Add more citations

Similar books and articles

Analytics

Added to PP index
2010-08-24

Total views
24 ( #443,122 of 2,432,727 )

Recent downloads (6 months)
3 ( #213,901 of 2,432,727 )

How can I increase my downloads?

Downloads

My notes