Is critical thinking epistemically responsible?

Metaphilosophy 36 (4):522-531 (2005)
  Copy   BIBTEX

Abstract

Three ways of approaching controversial issues are: (i) To accept the conclusions of experts on their authority; (ii) to evaluate the relevant evidence/arguments for ourselves; and (iii) to simply withhold judgement. The received view recommends strategy (ii). But (ii) is normally epistemically inferior to (i) and (iii), since we are justified in believing that it is less reliable at producing true beliefs and avoiding false ones.

Links

PhilArchive



    Upload a copy of this work     Papers currently archived: 91,998

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

Critical Thinking.Robert Ennis - 1991 - Teaching Philosophy 14 (1):4-18.
Trust and contextualism.Snjezana Prijic-Samarzija - 2007 - Acta Analytica 22 (2):125-138.
Re/Thinking Critical Thinking: The Seductions of Everyday Life.Kal Alston - 2001 - Studies in Philosophy and Education 20 (1):27-40.

Analytics

Added to PP
2010-08-10

Downloads
291 (#69,873)

6 months
21 (#126,192)

Historical graph of downloads
How can I increase my downloads?

Author's Profile

Michael Huemer
University of Colorado, Boulder

Citations of this work

Why Think for Yourself?Jonathan Matheson - 2022 - Episteme: A Journal of Social Epistemology:1-19.
Updating as Communication.Sarah Moss - 2012 - Philosophy and Phenomenological Research 85 (2):225-248.
Subjunctive Credences and Semantic Humility.Sarah Moss - 2012 - Philosophy and Phenomenological Research 87 (2):251-278.

View all 17 citations / Add more citations