Results for 'Scott Forrest Aikin'

1000+ found
Order:
  1.  31
    [Symposium] Anthony Robert Booth Islamic Philosophy and the Ethics of Belief. [REVIEW]Scott Forrest Aikin, Sabeen Ahmed, John Casey, Miriam Galston, Ethan Mills & Anthony Booth - 2018 - Syndicate Philosophy.
    No categories
    Direct download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  2.  9
    Scott F. Aikin and Robert B. Talisse .Why We Argue . A Guide to Political Disagreement. [REVIEW]Corina Andone - 2015 - Journal of Argumentation in Context 4 (2):236-239.
  3.  13
    Review of Scott F. Aikin, Evidentialism and the Will to Believe: Bloomsbury, 2014, ISBN: 978-1-6235-6017-1, Hb, X + 214pp. [REVIEW]Raphael Lataster - 2014 - Sophia 53 (4):587-588.
    Scott Aikin offers a much-needed comprehensive treatment of the Clifford-James debate on the ethics of belief. He aims to present the core arguments of William Clifford’s The Ethics of Belief and William James’ The Will to Believe and to provide commentary . Aikin begins by discussing Clifford’s ship owner case . Knowing that his ship is old, poorly built, and often needs repairs, the ship owner chooses to ignore the evidence and instead focuses on the character of (...)
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  4.  10
    Review: Scott F. Aikin[REVIEW]Review by: Cornelis de Waal - 2015 - Transactions of the Charles S. Peirce Society 51 (2):266-271.
    Direct download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  5. Don't Fear the Regress: Cognitive Values and Epistemic Infinitism: Aikin Don't Fear the Regress.Scott Aikin - 2009 - Think 8 (23):55-61.
    We are rational creatures, in that we are beings on whom demands of rationality are appropriate. But by our rationality it doesn't follow that we always live up to those demands. In those cases, we fail to be rational, but it is in a way that is different from how rocks, tadpoles, and gum fail to be rational. For them, we use the term ‘arational.’ They don't have the demands, but we do. The demands of rationality bear on us because (...)
    Direct download (7 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   2 citations  
  6. Epistemology and the Regress Problem.Scott Aikin - 2010 - Routledge.
    In the last decade, the familiar problem of the regress of reasons has returned to prominent consideration in epistemology. And with the return of the problem, evaluation of the options available for its solution is begun anew. Reason’s regress problem, roughly put, is that if one has good reasons to believe something, one must have good reason to hold those reasons are good. And for those reasons, one must have further reasons to hold they are good, and so a regress (...)
    Direct download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   28 citations  
  7.  35
    Reasonable Atheism: A Moral Case for Respectful Disbelief, by Scott F. Aikin and Robert B. Talisse.Timothy Chambers - 2013 - Teaching Philosophy 36 (3):291-293.
  8. Evidentialism and the Will to Believe by Scott F. Aikin[REVIEW]Cornelis de Waal - 2015 - Transactions of the Charles S. Peirce Society 51 (2):266-271.
    Scott Aikin’s Evidentialism and the Will to Believe is the first book-length discussion of W.K. Clifford’s 1877 “The Ethics of Belief ” and William James’s 1896 “The Will to Believe.” Except for twenty pages, the book splits evenly between a detailed discussion of the two essays. A good book demands some good criticism, and I am hoping that the comments I make are read in that light. Evidentialism and the Will to Believe appears in the Bloomsbury Research in (...)
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  9.  38
    Evidentialism and the Will to Believe, by Scott F Aikin: London: Bloomsbury Academic, 2014, Pp. X + 214, £65.Franca D'Agostini - 2015 - Australasian Journal of Philosophy 93 (3):625-626.
    Direct download (4 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  10.  70
    Deep Disagreement, the Dark Enlightenment, and the Rhetoric of the Red Pill.Scott F. Aikin - 2019 - Journal of Applied Philosophy 36 (3):420-435.
    Direct download (6 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   7 citations  
  11.  21
    Evidentialism and the Will to Believe, by Scott F. Aikin.Michael Pace - 2017 - Faith and Philosophy 34 (4):489-496.
    Direct download (4 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  12.  1
    Review of The Pragmatism Reader: From Peirce Through the Present, Ed. Robert B. Talisse and Scott F. Aikin[REVIEW]David Boersema - 2011 - Essays in Philosophy 12 (2):373-376.
    No categories
    Direct download (3 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  13.  82
    Evidentialism and the Will to Believe by Scott F. Aikin[REVIEW]Ruth Weintraub - 2015 - Review of Metaphysics 68 (4):833-834.
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  14. Developing Group-Deliberative Virtues.Scott F. Aikin & J. Caleb Clanton - 2010 - Journal of Applied Philosophy 27 (4):409-424.
    In this paper, the authors argue for two main claims: first, that the epistemic results of group deliberation can be superior to those of individual inquiry; and, second, that successful deliberative groups depend on individuals exhibiting deliberative virtues. The development of these group-deliberative virtues, the authors argue, is important not only for epistemic purposes but political purposes, as democracies require the virtuous deliberation of their citizens. Deliberative virtues contribute to the deliberative synergy of the group, not only in terms of (...)
    Direct download (5 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   25 citations  
  15. Who is Afraid of Epistemology’s Regress Problem?Scott F. Aikin - 2005 - Philosophical Studies 126 (2):191-217.
    What follows is a taxonomy of arguments that regresses of inferential justification are vicious. They fall out into four general classes: conceptual arguments from incompleteness, conceptual arguments from arbitrariness, ought-implies-can arguments from human quantitative incapacities, and ought-implies can arguments from human qualitative incapacities. They fail with a developed theory of "infinitism" consistent with valuational pluralism and modest epistemic foundationalism.
    Direct download (4 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   23 citations  
  16. Why We Argue : A Guide to Political Disagreement.Scott F. Aikin & Robert B. Talisse - 2013 - Routledge.
    Why We Argue : A Guide to Political Disagreement presents an accessible and engaging introduction to the theory of argument, with special emphasis on the way argument works in public political debate. The authors develop a view according to which proper argument is necessary for one’s individual cognitive health; this insight is then expanded to the collective health of one’s society. Proper argumentation, then, is seen to play a central role in a well-functioning democracy. Written in a lively style and (...)
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   7 citations  
  17.  26
    Evidentialism and the Will to Believe.Scott Aikin - 2014 - London, UK: Bloomsbury.
    An examination of the history and arguments behind W.K. Clifford and William James's landmark essays and subsequent impact on the importance of knowledge-based evidence.
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   6 citations  
  18.  58
    Deep Disagreement and the Problem of the Criterion.Scott F. Aikin - forthcoming - Topoi:1-8.
    My objective in this paper is to compare two philosophical problems, the problem of the criterion and the problem of deep disagreement, and note a core similarity which explains why many proposed solutions to these problems seem to fail along similar lines. From this observation, I propose a kind of skeptical solution to the problem of deep disagreement, and this skeptical program has consequences for the problem as it manifests in political epistemology and metaphilosophy.
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   4 citations  
  19.  52
    A Defense of War and Sport Metaphors in Argument.Scott Aikin - 2011 - Philosophy and Rhetoric 44 (3):250-272.
    There is a widely held concern that using war and sport metaphors to describe argument contributes to the breakdown of argumentative processes. The thumbnail version of this worry about such metaphors is that they promote adversarial conceptions of argument that lead interlocutors with those conceptions to behave adversarially in argumentative contexts. These actions are often aggressive, which undermines argument exchange by either excluding many from such exchanges or turning exchanges more into verbal battles. These worries are legitimate as far as (...)
    No categories
    Direct download (6 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   15 citations  
  20. Meta-Epistemology and the Varieties of Epistemic Infinitism.Scott F. Aikin - 2008 - Synthese 163 (2):175-185.
    I will assume here the defenses of epistemic infinitism are adequate and inquire as to the variety standpoints within the view. I will argue that infinitism has three varieties depending on the strength of demandingness of the infinitist requirement and the purity of its conception of epistemic justification, each of which I will term strong pure, strong impure, and weak impure infinitisms. Further, I will argue that impure infinitisms have the dialectical advantage.
    Direct download (4 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   13 citations  
  21.  69
    Pragmatism a Guide for the Perplexed.Robert B. Talisse & Scott Aikin - 2008 - London, UK: Continuum.
    The origins of pragmatism -- Pragmatism and epistemology -- Pragmatism and truth -- Pragmatism and metaphysics -- Pragmatism and ethics -- Pragmatism and politics -- Pragmatism and environmental ethics.
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   11 citations  
  22. Dialecticality and Deep Disagreement.Scott F. Aikin - 2018 - Symposion: Theoretical and Applied Inquiries in Philosophy and Social Sciences 5 (2):173-179.
    In this paper, I will argue for a complex of three theses. First, that the problem of deep disagreement is an instance of the regress problem of justification. Second, that the problem of deep disagreement, as a regress problem, depends on a dialecticality requirement for arguments. Third, that the dialecticality requirement is plausible and defensible.
    Direct download (5 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   2 citations  
  23.  98
    Straw Men, Weak Men, and Hollow Men.Scott F. Aikin & John Casey - 2011 - Argumentation 25 (1):87-105.
    Three forms of the straw man fallacy are posed: the straw, weak, and hollow man. Additionally, there can be non-fallacious cases of any of these species of straw man arguments.
    Direct download (4 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   11 citations  
  24.  86
    Two Forms of the Straw Man.Robert Talisse & Scott F. Aikin - 2006 - Argumentation 20 (3):345-352.
    The authors identify and offer an analysis of a new form of the Straw Man fallacy, and then explore the implications of the prevalence of this fallacy for contemporary political discourse.
    Direct download (4 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   15 citations  
  25. Still Searching for a Pragmatist Pluralism.Robert B. Talisse & Scott F. Aikin - 2005 - Transactions of the Charles S. Peirce Society 41 (1):145 - 160.
  26. Pragmatism, Naturalism, and Phenomenology.Scott F. Aikin - 2007 - Human Studies 29 (3):317-340.
    Pragmatism's naturalism is inconsistent with the phenomenological tradition's anti-naturalism. This poses a problem for the methodological consistency of phenomenological work in the pragmatist tradition. Solutions such as phenomenologizing naturalism or naturalizing phenomenology have been proposed, but they fail. As a consequence, pragmatists and other naturalists must answer the phenomenological tradition's criticisms of naturalism.
    Direct download (4 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   7 citations  
  27.  18
    The Pragmatism Reader: From Peirce Through the Present.Robert B. Talisse & Scott F. Aikin (eds.) - 2011 - Princeton University Press.
    The Pragmatism Reader is the essential anthology of this important philosophical movement. Each selection featured here is a key writing by a leading pragmatist thinker, and represents a distinctively pragmatist approach to a core philosophical problem. The collection includes work by pragmatism's founders, Charles Peirce, William James, and John Dewey, as well as seminal writings by mid-twentieth-century pragmatists such as Sidney Hook, C. I. Lewis, Nelson Goodman, Rudolf Carnap, Wilfrid Sellars, and W.V.O. Quine. This reader also includes the most important (...)
    No categories
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   5 citations  
  28.  11
    Reply to My Commentator - Aikin.Scott F. Aikin - unknown
    No categories
    Direct download (3 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  29.  17
    The Owl of Minerva Problem.Scott Aikin - 2020 - Southwest Philosophy Review 36 (1):13-22.
    No categories
    Direct download (3 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   1 citation  
  30. Tu Quoque Arguments and the Significance of Hypocrisy.Scott F. Aikin - 2008 - Informal Logic 28 (2):155-169.
    Though textbook tu quoque arguments are fallacies of relevance, many versions of arguments from hypocrisy are indirectly relevant to the issue. Some arguments from hypocrisy are challenges to the authority of a speaker on the basis of either her sincerity or competency regarding the issue. Other arguments from hypocrisy purport to be evidence of the impracticability of the opponent’s proposals. Further, some versions of hypocrisy charges from impracticability are open to a counter that I will term tu quoque judo.
    Direct download (11 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   7 citations  
  31. Prospects For Peircean Epistemic Infinitism.Scott F. Aikin - 2009 - Contemporary Pragmatism 6 (2):71-87.
    Epistemic infinitism is the view that infinite series of inferential relations are productive of epistemic justification. Peirce is explicitly infinitist in his early work, namely his 1868 series of articles. Further, Peirce's semiotic categories of firsts, seconds, and thirds favors a mixed theory of justification. The conclusion is that Peirce was an infinitist, and particularly, what I will term an impure infinitist. However, the prospects for Peirce's infinitism depend entirely on the prospects for Peirce's early semantics, which are not good. (...)
    Direct download (6 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   3 citations  
  32.  11
    What Optimistic Responses to Deep Disagreement Get Right.Scott F. Aikin - 2020 - Co-herencia 17 (32):225-238.
    In this paper, I argue for three theses. First, that the problem of Deep Disagreement is usefully understood as an instance of the skeptical Problem of the Criterion. Second, there are structural similarities between proposed optimistic answers to deep disagreement and the problem of the criterion. Third, in light of these similarities, there are both good and bad consequences for proposed solutions to the problem of deep disagreement.
    No categories
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   1 citation  
  33.  50
    Prospects for A Levinasian Epistemic Infinitism.J. Aaron Simmons & Scott F. Aikin - 2012 - International Journal of Philosophical Studies 20 (3):437-460.
    Abstract Epistemic infinitism is certainly not a majority view in contemporary epistemology. While there are some examples of infinitism in the history of philosophy, more work needs to be done mining this history in order to provide a richer understanding of how infinitism might be formulated internal to different philosophical frameworks. Accordingly, we argue that the philosophy of Emmanuel Levinas can be read as operating according to an ?impure? model of epistemic infinitism. The infinite obligation inaugurated by the ?face to (...)
    Direct download (3 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   4 citations  
  34.  28
    Why We Argue: A Sketch of an Epistemic-Democratic Program.Scott F. Aikin & Robert B. Talisse - 2014 - Inquiry: Critical Thinking Across the Disciplines 29 (2):60-67.
    This essay summarizes the research program developed in our new book, Why We Argue : A Guide to Political Disagreement. Humans naturally want to know and to take themselves as having reason on their side. Additionally, many people take democracy to be a uniquely proper mode of political arrangement. There is an old tension between reason and democracy, however, and it was first articulated by Plato. Plato’s concern about democracy was that it detached political decision from reason. Epistemic democrats attempt (...)
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   3 citations  
  35.  10
    Reasonable Atheism: A Moral Case for Respectful Disbelief.Scott F. Aikin - 2011 - Prometheus Books.
    Arguing in mixed company -- What atheism is -- On the new atheism -- Ethics without God -- A moral case for atheism -- Religion in politics.
    Direct download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   3 citations  
  36.  79
    The Problem of Worship.Scott F. Aikin - 2010 - Think 9 (25):101-113.
    Theism is a cluster of views. The first of which is that God exists. Others are that God has all the relevant omni-attributes, that He created the world, and that He communicates with and performs miracles on behalf of humans. There is one additional view that is often overlooked. It is that humans are obligated to worship God. Importantly, this issue of worship is of central importance to traditional theism. And it extends into pagan thought that predates Christianity. Take, for (...)
    Direct download (6 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   4 citations  
  37. Modest Evidentialism.Scott F. Aikin - 2006 - International Philosophical Quarterly 46 (3):327-343.
    Evidentialism is the view that subjects should believe neither more than nor contrary to what their current evidence supports. I will critically present two arguments for the view. A common source of resistance to evidentialism is that there are intuitive cases where subjects should believe contrary to their evidence. I will present modest evidentialism as the view that subjects should believe in accord with what their evidence supports, but that this norm may be overridden under certain conditions. As such, a (...)
    Direct download (4 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   5 citations  
  38.  51
    Prospects for Skeptical Foundationalism.Scott F. Aikin - 2007 - Metaphilosophy 38 (5):578-590.
    Direct download (5 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   2 citations  
  39.  3
    Pragmatism, Pluralism, and the Nature of Philosophy.Scott F. Aikin & Robert B. Talisse - 2017 - Routledge.
  40.  41
    Pragmatism, Experience, and the Given.Scott Aikin - 2009 - Human Affairs 19 (1).
  41.  62
    Prospects for Moral Epistemic Infinitism.Scott F. Aikin - 2014 - Metaphilosophy 45 (2):172-181.
    This article poses two regresses for justification of moral knowledge and discusses three models for moral epistemic infinitism that arise. There are moral infinitisms dependent on empirical infinitism, what are called “piggyback” moral infinitisms. There are substantive empiricist moral infinitisms, requiring infinite chains of descriptive facts to justify normative rules. These empiricist infinitisms are developed either as infinitist egoisms or as infinitist sentimentalisms. And, finally, there are substantive rationalist moral infinitisms, requiring infinite chains of normative reasons to justify moral rules. (...)
    Direct download (5 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   2 citations  
  42.  60
    Kitcher on the Ethics of Inquiry.Robert B. Talisse & Scott F. Aikin - 2007 - Journal of Social Philosophy 38 (4):654-665.
    The thesis that scientific inquiry must operate within moral constraints is familiar and unobjectionable in cases involving immoral treatment of experimental subjects, as in the infamous Tuskegee experiments. However, in Science, Truth, and Democracy1 and related work,2 Philip Kitcher envisions a more controversial set of constraints. Specifically, he argues that inquiry ought not to be pursued in cases where the consequences of its pursuit are likely to affect negatively the lives of individuals who comprise a socially underprivileged group. This constraint (...)
    Direct download (5 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   5 citations  
  43.  53
    Contrastive Self‐Attribution of Belief.Scott F. Aikin - 2006 - Social Epistemology 20 (1):93 – 103.
    A common argument for evidentialism is that the norms of assertion, specifically those bearing on warrant and assertability, regulate belief. On this assertoric model of belief, a constitutive condition for belief is that the believing subject take her belief to be supported by sufficient evidence. An equally common source of resistance to these arguments is the plausibility of cases in which a speaker, despite the fact that she lacks warrant to assert that p, nevertheless attributes to herself the belief that (...)
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   5 citations  
  44.  49
    Holding One’s Own.Scott F. Aikin - 2008 - Argumentation 22 (4):571-584.
    There is a tension with regard to regulative norms of inquiry. One’s commitments must survive critical scrutiny, and if they do not survive, they should be revised. Alternately, for views to be adequately articulated and defended, their proponents must maintain a strong commitment to the views in question. A solution is proposed with the notion of holding one’s own as the virtue of being reason-responsive with the prospects of improving the view in question.
    Direct download (4 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   4 citations  
  45. Citizen Skeptic: Cicero’s Academic Republicanism.Scott Aikin - 2015 - Symposion: Theoretical and Applied Inquiries in Philosophy and Social Sciences 2 (3):275–285.
    The skeptical challenge to politics is that if knowledge is in short supply and it is a condition for the proper use of political power, then there is very little just politics. Cicero’s Republicanism is posed as a program for political legitimacy wherein both citizens and their states are far from ideal. The result is a form of what is termed negative conservatism, which shows political gridlock in a more positive light.
    Direct download (5 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   1 citation  
  46. Three Challenges To Jamesian Ethics.Scott Aikin & Robert Talisse - 2011 - William James Studies 6:3-9.
    Classical pragmatism is committed to the thought that philosophy must be relevant to ordinary life. This commitment is frequently employed critically: to show that some idea is irrelevant to ordinary life is to prove it to be expendable. But the commitment is also constructive: pragmatists must strive to make their positive views relevant. Accordingly, one would expect the classical pragmatists to have fixed their attention on ethics, since this is the area of philosophy most attuned to everyday problems. Although ethics (...)
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   3 citations  
  47.  61
    Argument in Mixed Company: Mom's Maxim Vs. Mill's Principle: Aikin and Talisse Argument in Mixed Company.Scott Aikin - 2011 - Think 10 (27):31-43.
    It is impolite to discuss matters of religion or politics in mixed company. So goes the popular adage which all of us were supposed to have learned as children from our mothers. Let's call it Mom's Maxim. We tend to accept Mom's Maxim. But is it philosophically sound? In this short essay, we raise some objections to Mom's Maxim and make a case for an alternative which we call Mill's Principle.
    Direct download (6 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  48.  77
    Perelmanian Universal Audience and the Epistemic Aspirations of Argument.Scott F. Aikin - 2008 - Philosophy and Rhetoric 41 (3):pp. 238-259.
  49. Wittgenstein, Dewey, and the Possibility of Religion.Scott F. Aikin & Michael P. Hodges - 2006 - Journal of Speculative Philosophy 20 (1):1-19.
    John Dewey points out in A Common Faith (1934) that what stands in the way of religious belief for many is the apparent commitment of Western religious traditions to supernatural phenomena and questionable historical claims. We are to accept claims that in any other context we would find laughable. Are we to believe that water can be turned into wine without the benefit of the fermentation process? Are we to swallow the claim that there is such a phenomenon as the (...)
    Direct download (6 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   3 citations  
  50.  25
    ’KNOWLEDGE IS TRUE BELIEF’ REBUTTED.Scott F. Aikin - 2010 - European Journal of Analytic Philosohy 6 (2):5 - 13.
1 — 50 / 1000