Open-minded people should endorse dogmatism because of its explanatory power. Dogmatism holds that, in the absence of defeaters, a seeming that P necessarily provides non-inferential justification for P. I show that dogmatism provides an intuitive explanation of four issues concerning non-inferential justification. It is particularly impressive that dogmatism can explain these issues because prominent epistemologists have argued that it can’t address at least two of them. Prominent epistemologists also object that dogmatism is absurdly permissive because it allows a seeming (...) to provide justification even if the seeming was caused in some apparently inappropriate way. I conclude by disarming this objection. (shrink)

Actively open-minded thinking is often used as a proxy for reflective thinking in research on reasoning and related fields. It is associated with less biased reasoning in many types of tasks. However, few studies have examined its psychometric properties and criterion validity. We developed a shortened, 17-item version of the AOT for quicker administration. AOT17 is highly correlated with the original 41-item scale and has highly similar relationships to other thinking dispositions, social competence and supernatural beliefs. Our analyses revealed (...) that the AOT is not a unitary construct, but comprises four distinct dimensions, some of which concern attitudes towards knowledge, and others concern attitudes towards people. This factor structure was replicated in another data-set, and correlations with other measures in four data-sets support the criterion validity of these dimensions. Different dimensions were responsible for the AOT's relationships with other thinking dispositions. (shrink)

Orthodox Bayesianism endorses revising by conditionalization. This paper investigates the zero-raising problem, or equivalently the certainty-dropping problem of orthodox Bayesianism: previously neglected possibilities remain neglected, although the new evidence might suggest otherwise. Yet, one may want to model open-minded agents, that is, agents capable of raising previously neglected possibilities. Different reasons can be given for open-mindedness, one of which is fallibilism. The paper proposes a family of open-minded propositional revisions depending on a parameter ϵ. The basic idea (...) is this: first extend the prior to the newly suggested possibilities by mixing the prior with the uniform probability on these possibilities, then conditionalize. This may put the agent back on the right track when her beliefs or evidence happen to be false. The paper justifies this family of equivocal epsilon-conditionalizations as minimal non-biased open-minded modifications of conditionalization. Several variations are discussed, such as mixing with an ad hoc or silent prior instead of the uniform prior, and a generalization to probabilistic information is given. The approach is compared to other accounts, such as Jeffrey’s Bayesianism, Gärdenfors’s probabilistic revision, maximizing entropy, and minimal revision. _1_ Introduction _2_ Downsides of Certainty Conservation _3_ Why Raise Zeros? _3.1_ Accuracy defects _3.2_ Fallibilism and dissolutions _3.3_ Weak fallibilism and partial solutions _4_ Epsilon-Conditionalization _4.1_ Definitions _4.2_ Revision types and information assumptions _4.3_ Epsilon interpretation and flavours _5_ Justifications _5.1_ Open-minded orthodox Bayesianism _5.2_ Minimal revision _5.3_ Transitivity _6_ Conclusion Appendix. (shrink)

Explores the relationship between philosophers' and psychoanalysts' attempts to discover how man thinks and perceives himself.

Some philosophers working on the epistemology of disagreement claim that conciliationist responses to peer disagreement embody a kind of intellectual humility. Others contend that standing firm or ‘sticking to one's guns’ in the face of peer disagreement may stem from an admirable kind of courage or internal fortitude. In this paper, we report the results of two empirical studies that examine the relationship between conciliationist and steadfast responses to peer disagreement, on the one hand, and virtues such as intellectual humility, (...) courage, grit, and actively open-minded thinking, on the other. We observed positive correlations between measures of conciliationism, intellectual humility, and actively open-minded thinking but failed to find any reliable association between steadfastness, courage, and grit. Our studies reveal that there are at least two important intellectual virtues associated with conciliationist responses to peer disagreement (viz., intellectual humility and actively open-minded thinking) and two vices associated with steadfast responses (intellectual arrogance and myside bias). These findings shed new light on the overall epistemic goodness of the conciliationist perspective. (shrink)

In this paper we will discuss the issue of environmental advocacy in science education in light of William Hare’s concept of open-mindedness. Although we shall assume that science teaching and learning must go beyond the scientific facts and theories and deal with the implications of science for society, we shall argue that science education should also demand an open-mindedness about environmental concerns such that all proposals for sustainability and the like are weighed against the alternatives using the best (...) scientific knowledge available. Our approach will be to describe two examples of environmental education that recommend insufficiently open-minded forms of teaching and a third example that avoids this shortcoming yet provides a sound basis in environmental education. (shrink)

What does it mean to keep an “open mind”? In casual conversation it’s a popular phrase with enough common sense to negate much need for debate about what the speaker means. Someone with an open mind might be considered considerate, equanimous, empathetic, a good listener, curious, or flexible in opinion. In Western culture an open-minded person might be receptive to new ideas, possibilities, and interpretations, suggesting that they successfully maintain an engaged yet dynamic mental relationship (...) to various subjects or challenges. Yet in science’s nascent study of consciousness, the notion of a mind “opening” is complicated by the field’s inability to clearly articulate what a mind is, let alone how, or into what, it might open. It is the purpose of this research to present the biological significance of “open-mindedness” in order to discuss possible phenomenological implications pertaining to neural correlates of consciousness (NCC). In his seminal book The Open Work, Umberto Eco describes “openness” as a phenomenon of conscious organization that “locates the infinite at the very core of the finite,” and “invites us to conceive, feel, and thus see the world as possibility.” Utilizing the methods of Mechanics, Dynamics, Aesthetics (MDA) analysis, my critical phenomenological inquiry extends Eco’s lens of cultural semiotics into quantum biology to provide key insights for understanding the aesthetic role of field dynamics in qualia physics—as interpretive events (i.e., watching a film, tasting a dessert, or drawing). In particular, pairing Eco’s semiotic analysis of openness with Hameroff and Penrose’s OR Theory concerning cognitive qualia-producing architectures such as microtubules, raises how sensations between organisms and the Zero Point Field (ZPF) are absorbed, integrated, and transmitted through quantum Stochastic Electrodynamic (SED) information states proposed by Joachim Keppler. Therefore, we can say that living systems are those systems that have adapted their material capabilities (including fundamental principles of self-organization and complexity in common cognitive architectures like awareness and attention) to perceive and critically interpret coherently. That is to say—biology has evolved to make meaning through its very aliveness. Our conscious ability to open our minds in order to interpret and communicate our sensations, thoughts, and complete experiences, therefore reveals a radically multidimensional bio-geometry and biolinguistics based on a field dynamics, which Eco’s work constructs. Via an aesthetic information theory, Eco describes this phenomenon as, “a practical level of poetics that acts as programmatic projects for creation.” The writings of Rumi, Husserl, Dewey, Emerson, Merleau-Ponty, Hegel, and others confer depth to the emergent mechanics of perception found throughout biotic systems. Eco’s ideas thereby provoke discourse on the role of openness within recent theoretical works by Jeremy England, Anirban Bandyopadhyay, Robert Lanza, Deepak Chopra, Ervin Laszlo, Giulio Tononi, Stuart Kauffman, Walter J. Freeman, Robin Carhart-Harris, Mark P. Mattson, Robert R McCrae, Selen Atasoy, Katherine Peil, Terence Deacon, and David Chalmers. Unlike models of consciousness that arise from closed, local computation, I argue that the phenomenon of open mindedness unifies cultural and scientific concepts of consciousness as life’s critical integrative force. (shrink)

This is an edited collection of 39 original papers and as many commentaries and replies. The target papers and replies were written by senior members of the MIND Group, while all commentaries were written by junior group members. All papers and commentaries have undergone a rigorous process of anonymous peer review, during which the junior members of the MIND Group acted as reviewers. The final versions of all the target articles, commentaries and replies have undergone additional editorial review. (...) -/- Besides offering a cross-section of ongoing, cutting-edge research in philosophy and cognitive science, this collection is also intended to be a free electronic resource for teaching. It therefore also contains a selection of online supporting materials, pointers to video and audio files and to additional free material supplied by the 92 authors represented in this volume. We will add more multimedia material, a searchable literature database, and tools to work with the online version in the future. All contributions to this collection are strictly open access. They can be downloaded, printed, and non-commercially reproduced by anyone. DOI: 10.15502/9783958571020 http://dx.doi.org/10.15502/9783958571020 ISBN: 978-3-95857-102-0. (shrink)

In _Modal Logic for Open Minds,_ Johan van Benthem provides an up-to-date introduction to the field of modal logic, outlining its major ideas and exploring the numerous ways in which various academic fields have adopted it. Van Benthem begins with the basic theories of modal logic, semantics, bisimulation, and axiomatics, and also covers more advanced topics, such as expressive power and computational complexity. The book then moves to a wide range of applications, including new developments in information flow, intelligent (...) agency, and games. Taken together, the chapters show modal logic at the crossroads of philosophy, mathematics, linguistics, computer science, and economics. Most of the chapters are followed by exercises, making this volume ideal for undergraduate and graduate students in philosophy, computer science, symbolic systems, cognitive science, and linguistics. (shrink)

In _Modal Logic for Open Minds,_ Johan van Benthem provides an up-to-date introduction to the field of modal logic, outlining its major ideas and exploring the numerous ways in which various academic fields have adopted it. Van Benthem begins with the basic theories of modal logic, semantics, bisimulation, and axiomatics, and also covers more advanced topics, such as expressive power and computational complexity. The book then moves to a wide range of applications, including new developments in information flow, intelligent (...) agency, and games. Taken together, the chapters show modal logic at the crossroads of philosophy, mathematics, linguistics, computer science, and economics. Most of the chapters are followed by exercises, making this volume ideal for undergraduate and graduate students in philosophy, computer science, symbolic systems, cognitive science, and linguistics. (shrink)

When should you engage with difficult arguments against your cherished controversial beliefs? The primary conclusion of this book is that your obligations to engage with counterarguments are more limited than is often thought. In some standard situations, you shouldn't engage with difficult counterarguments and, if you do, you shouldn't engage with them open-mindedly. This conclusion runs counter to aspects of the Millian political tradition and political liberalism, as well as what people working in informal logic tend to say about (...) argumentation. -/- Not all misleading arguments wear their flaws on their sleeve. Each step of a misleading argument might seem compelling and you might not be able to figure out what's wrong with it. Still, even if you can't figure out what's wrong with an argument, you can know that it's misleading. One way to know that an argument is misleading is, counterintuitively, to lack expertise in the methods and evidence-types employed by the argument. When you know that a counterargument is misleading, you shouldn't engage with it open-mindedly and sometimes shouldn't engage with it at all. You shouldn't engage open-mindedly because you shouldn't be willing to reduce your confidence in response to arguments you know are misleading. And you sometimes shouldn't engage closed-mindedly, because to do so can be manipulative or ineffective. -/- In making this case, Jeremy Fantl discusses echo chambers and group polarization, the importance in academic writing of a sympathetic case for the opposition, the epistemology of disagreement, the account of open-mindedness, and invitations to problematic academic speakers. (shrink)

In this study, Open Mind – an interactive learning platform – was introduced as a pedagogical tool in developing students’ intellectual humility using a sample of 35 upper level undergraduate business students enrolled in a business ethics course in the mid-Atlantic region of the U.S.. Students completed the 5-step Open Mind learning assignment as a measure of intellectual humility during the first four weeks of class. Class lectures were concurrently given while students completed the Open (...) Mind exercise. Students were subsequently required to debate a controversial topic during the remaining 11 weeks of the class. Various grading rubrics as well as skill assessment matrix are provided to assist faculty in adopting this learning platform in their classrooms. Initial evidence showed that Open Mind was efficacious in fostering student intellectual humility. Implications for teaching business ethics using Open Mind to cultivate intellectual humility are discussed. (shrink)

A reflection on the symposium ‘Clear-sighted Art – Open Mind? Encounters between Art and Esotericism’ arranged at the Amos Rex Art Museum, Helsinki, 25th August 2020.

Idealism and ideologies -- Historical inevitability -- On human rights -- Marxism and liberty -- Marxism and ethics -- The marxist answer to the challenge of our time -- Marxist humanism -- Sartre and society -- Berdyaev, socialist and heretic -- Communism the heir to the Christian tradition.

This is a brief guide to the ideal of open-minded inquiry by way of a survey of related notions. Making special reference to the educational context, the aim is to offer teachers an insight into what it wouldmean for their work to be influenced by this ideal, and to lead students to a deeper appredation of open-minded inquiry. From assumptions to zealotry, the glossary provides an account of a wide rangeof concepts in this family of ideas, reflecting a (...) concern and a connection throughout with the central concept of open-mindedness itself. An intricate network of relationships is uncovered that reveals therichness of this ideal; and many confusions and misunderstandings that runder a proper appreciation of open-mindedness are identified. (shrink)

This is a brief guide to the ideal of open-minded inquiry by way of a survey of related notions. Making special reference to the educational context, the aim is to offer teachers an insight into what it wouldmean for their work to be influenced by this ideal, and to lead students to a deeper appredation of open-minded inquiry. From assumptions to zealotry, the glossary provides an account of a wide rangeof concepts in this family of ideas, reflecting a (...) concern and a connection throughout with the central concept of open-mindedness itself. An intricate network of relationships is uncovered that reveals therichness of this ideal; and many confusions and misunderstandings that runder a proper appreciation of open-mindedness are identified. (shrink)

Within the field of virtue and vice epistemology open-mindedness is usually considered an archetypal virtue. Nevertheless, there is ongoing disagreement over how exactly it should be defined. In this paper I propose a novel definition of open-mindedness as a process of impartial belief revision and use it to argue that we should shift our normative assessments away from the trait itself to the context in which it is exercised. My definition works by three sequential stages: not screening new (...) claims, impartially weighing the evidential strength of claims, and updating beliefs accordingly. Using this definition I argue for a focus on agents’ particular circumstances to determine what degrees of credulity, open-, or closed-mindedness are appropriate in any given situation. As well as providing conceptual clarity regarding the concept of open-mindedness this paper indicates the benefits of this contextual approach for our everyday epistemic attitudes. In particular it enables us to recognise, without stigma, when ourselves or others deviate from open-mindedness for appropriate reasons. (shrink)

An argument against dual process theories and unconscious thought to explain the human mind and behavior.

Erin Murphy-Graham draws on more than a decade of qualitative research to examine the experiences of Juanita and eighteen other women who participated in the SAT program.

Some philosophers working on the epistemology of disagreement claim that conciliationist responses to peer disagreement embody a kind of intellectual humility. Others contend that standing firm or “sticking to one’s guns” in the face of peer disagreement may stem from an admirable kind of courage or internal fortitude. In this paper, we report the results of two empirical studies that examine the relationship between conciliationist and steadfast responses to peer disagreement, on the one hand, and virtues such as intellectual humility, (...) courage, grit, and actively open-minded thinking, on the other. We observed positive correlations between measures of conciliationism, intellectual humility, and actively open-minded thinking but failed to find any reliable association between steadfastness, courage, and grit. Our studies reveal that there are at least two important intellectual virtues associated with conciliationist responses to peer disagreement (viz., intellectual humility and actively open-minded thinking) and two vices associated with steadfast responses (intellectual arrogance and myside bias). These findings shed new light on the overall epistemic goodness of the conciliationist perspective. -/- keywords: disagreement, conciliationism, steadfastness, intellectual humility, courage, actively open-minded thinking. (shrink)

In this article, I suggest that an open mind wholly unburdened by preconceptions and prejudgments is a mistaken ideal. Not only is it unrealistic; it deprives us of context and background knowledge relevant to judging well. I begin with two cases that show how the ideal of the “prejudice-free” mind, though appealing, may end up thwarting good judgment: blind assessment and “blank-slate” jury selection. I then trace the prejudice-free ideal to the Enlightenment, exposing its roots in the (...) subject-object worldview. Drawing on Heidegger, I suggest that the subject-object worldview is misguided and that all judgment involves a prior understanding of the matter we judge. To have an open mind, paradoxically, is to have a stake in defending a prior understanding, to be possessed of an understanding of the good that one wishes to promote. I then draw out the implications of this view for how we might make sense of cultural differences,... (shrink)

Church-ethical statements in the context of contemporary medicine often give rise to a lot of controversy and commotion. Just think of the debates about medically assisted reproduction, genetics, prenatal diagnosis, stem cell research, organ donation, palliative sedation or euthanasia. Paul Schotsmans notes that many of these statements are inspired by a well-defined ethical model, specifically the act-deontological model. He argues that a more dynamic ethical model (personalism based on Western-European value-systems) creates space for a humane integration of the new medical (...) possibilities. With this book, he seeks to indicate how Christian faith can be an inspiration for an open-minded, humane and dynamic health care. (shrink)

Jonathan Lear, member of the Committee on Social Thought at the University of Chicago, psychoanalyst, and author of works on Aristotle’s logic and epistemology and a philosophical interpretation of Freudian psychoanalysis, has compiled a collection of 12 essays, all but three previously published, reflective of his varied training and talents. The essays themselves range from a piece in The New Republic on the “Freud-bashing” that led to the cancellation of the Library of Congress’s exhibition “Sigmund Freud: Conflict and Culture” late (...) in 1995 to fairly technical pieces written for the Journal of the American Psychoanalytic Association, Phronesis, and the Proceedings of the Aristotelian Society. Original dates of publication range widely as well, from 1984 to 1996, and would seem to mark the author’s intellectual pilgrimage, outlined in his Preface: from the preserves of analytic philosophy, often identified by him with professional philosophy simpliciter, to the more “open-minded” concern with the history of philosophy and Freudian psychoanalysis. He contrasts his own concern with the Platonic problem, “giving a logos of the psyche” or “working out the logic of the soul,” to the computationism of modern psychology departments and to “ersatz philosophy.” Ersatz philosophy is exemplified, in his interpretation by Oedipus’ thoughtless, self-oblivious argumentation which, according to a footnote, may count its “modern descendants in verificationism, Popperianism, ordinary-language philosophy”. In a passage that explains the book’s title, Lear affirms the truth that he believes Socrates’ life represented: “that we have the capacity to be open minded: the capacity to live nondefensively with the question of how to live”. (shrink)

EVERYONE THINKS they are open-minded. Scientists in particular like to think they have open minds, but we know from psychology that this is just one of those attributes that people like to apply to themselves. We shouldn’t perhaps have to worry about it at all, except that parapsychology forces one to ask, "Do I believe in this, do I disbelieve in this, or do I have an open mind?".

This paper criticises rationalist ideas of intellectual honesty, arguing that the ethics of belief reduces to an ethics of inquiry, and that the ethics of inquiry should be based not on the dubious concept of 'sufficiency' of evidence but on economic considerations, such as the availability of time, resources and opportunities. Thus an inquiry may be sufficient for one person and not for another - which makes intellectual honesty difficult to assess. Scientific inquiry is also concerned with belief (to be (...) worth constructing a theory must be at least 'potentially credible'), and the same ethical and economic considerations apply, e.g. to choice between research programs. They apply also to discussion and teaching, e.g. in judging whether participants in discussion are as open-minded as they should be, or whether a teacher is giving due credit to a student whose opinions he disagrees with, or whether he exercises improper censorship. (shrink)

Weitz claims that humanistic philosophy requires open concepts. Concepts are said to be "neutral intermediaries between words and things". For Frege they must be sharply defined; for Weitz open concepts are sets of criteria that are either nonnecessary or nonsufficient or both in the definition of something, though they may be rejectable or undebatable. Thus he dismisses with Karl Popper "essentialism," and thus also Platonism and Aristotelianism. He finds early suggestions of open concepts in C. L. Stevenson’s (...) "Persuasive Definitions," Friedrich Waismann’s "Verifiability," H. L. A. Hart’s "defeasible contracts," Wittgenstein’s "family resemblances," and W. B. Gallie’s "Essentially Contested Concepts." He asserts "... the discovery of open concepts—not just ambiguous, vague or woolly words, which open concepts and their conveying words are not—throws new light on the whole problem of conceptualization". Real definitions then can be only of closed concepts, such as may prevail in science; while the fruits of open concepts are especially characteristic of the humanities, though certainly not limited to them. (shrink)