Rumination and Wronging: The Role of Attention in Epistemic Morality

Episteme 19 (4):491-514 (2022)
  Copy   BIBTEX

Abstract

The idea that our epistemic practices can be wrongful has been the core observation driving the growing literature on epistemic injustice, doxastic wronging, and moral encroachment. But, one element of our epistemic practice has been starkly absent from this discussion of epistemic morality: attention. The goal of this article is to show that attention is a worthwhile focus for epistemology, especially for the field of epistemic morality. After presenting a new dilemma for proponents of doxastic wronging, I show how focusing on attention not only allows us to defuse that dilemma, but also helps to substantiate accounts of what goes wrong in cases of doxastic wronging.

Other Versions

No versions found

Analytics

Added to PP
2022-08-24

Downloads
1,193 (#17,606)

6 months
228 (#14,982)

Historical graph of downloads
How can I increase my downloads?

Author's Profile

Catharine (Cat) Saint-Croix
University of Minnesota

Citations of this work

Attention as selection for action defended.Wayne Wu - 2025 - Philosophy and Phenomenological Research 110 (2):421-441.
Varieties of Bias.Gabbrielle M. Johnson - 2024 - Philosophy Compass (7):e13011.
Morality of Belief I: How Beliefs Wrong.Rima Basu - 2023 - Philosophy Compass (7):1-10.

View all 15 citations / Add more citations

References found in this work

What We Owe to Each Other.Thomas Scanlon (ed.) - 1998 - Cambridge: Harvard University Press.
The wrongs of racist beliefs.Rima Basu - 2018 - Philosophical Studies 176 (9):2497-2515.
Doxastic Wronging.Rima Basu & Mark Schroeder - 2018 - In Brian Kim & Matthew McGrath, Pragmatic Encroachment in Epistemology. New York: Routledge. pp. 181-205.
What We Epistemically Owe To Each Other.Rima Basu - 2019 - Philosophical Studies 176 (4):915–931.

View all 27 references / Add more references