Epistemic dilemmas and rational indeterminacy

Philosophical Studies 177 (3):573-596 (2020)
  Copy   BIBTEX

Abstract

This paper is about epistemic dilemmas, i.e., cases in which one is doomed to have a doxastic attitude that is rationally impermissible no matter what. My aim is to develop and defend a position according to which there can be genuine rational indeterminacy; that is, it can be indeterminate which principles of rationality one should satisfy and thus indeterminate which doxastic attitudes one is permitted or required to have. I am going to argue that this view can resolve epistemic dilemmas in a systematic way while also enjoying some important advantages over its rivals.

Links

PhilArchive



    Upload a copy of this work     Papers currently archived: 76,140

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

Belief and Indeterminacy.Michael Caie - 2012 - Philosophical Review 121 (1):1-54.
Higher-Order Defeat Without Epistemic Dilemmas.Mattias Skipper - 2018 - Logos and Episteme 9 (4):451-465.
Rational Feedback.Grant Reaber - 2012 - Philosophical Quarterly 62 (249):797-819.
Dilemmic Epistemology.Nick Hughes - 2019 - Synthese 196 (10):4059-4090.
The Problem of Rational Knowledge.Mark Jago - 2013 - Erkenntnis (S6):1-18.
The illusion of discretion.Kurt Sylvan - 2016 - Synthese 193 (6):1635-1665.
Doxastic permissiveness and the promise of truth.J. Drake - 2017 - Synthese 194 (12):4897-4912.
The Conflict of Evidence and Coherence.Alex Worsnip - 2018 - Philosophy and Phenomenological Research 96 (1):3-44.
Distant Peers.Mark Vorobej - 2011 - Metaphilosophy 42 (5):708-722.

Analytics

Added to PP
2018-11-11

Downloads
83 (#148,640)

6 months
8 (#104,758)

Historical graph of downloads
How can I increase my downloads?

Author's Profile

Nick Leonard
Northwestern University

Citations of this work

Rationality is not coherence.Nora Heinzelmann - 2022 - Philosophical Quarterly 999.
Misleading higher-order evidence, conflicting ideals, and defeasible logic.Aleks Knoks - 2021 - Ergo: An Open Access Journal of Philosophy 8:141--74.
Normative Indeterminacy in the Epistemic Domain.Nicholas Leonard & Fabrizio Cariani - forthcoming - In Kevin McCain, Scott Stapleford & Matthias Steup (eds.), Epistemic Dilemmas: New Arguments, New Angles. K. McCain, S. Stapleford & M. Steup.
Rationality for the Self-Aware (Ernest Sosa Lecture).David Christensen - 2021 - Proceedings and Addresses of the American Philosophical Association 95:215-236.

View all 7 citations / Add more citations

References found in this work

Accuracy and the Laws of Credence.Richard Pettigrew - 2016 - New York, NY.: Oxford University Press UK.
The Possibility of Altruism.Thomas Nagel - 1970 - Oxford Clarendon Press.
Epistemology of disagreement: The good news.David Christensen - 2007 - Philosophical Review 116 (2):187-217.
Vagueness, truth and logic.Kit Fine - 1975 - Synthese 30 (3-4):265-300.
Higher‐Order Evidence and the Limits of Defeat.Maria Lasonen-Aarnio - 2014 - Philosophy and Phenomenological Research 88 (2):314-345.

View all 53 references / Add more references