Maguire, B and Woods, J (2020) The Game of Belief. The Philosophical Review, 129 (2). pp. 211-249. ISSN 0031-8108
Abstract
It is plausible that there is a distinctively epistemic standard of correctness for belief. It is also plausible that there is a range of practical reasons bearing on belief. These theses are often thought to be in tension with each other. To resolve the tension, the authors draw on an analogy with a similar distinction between types of reasons for actions in the context of activities. This motivates a two-level account of the structure of normativity. The account relies upon a further distinction between normative reasons and authoritatively normative reasons. Only the latter constitutively play the functional role of explaining what state one just plain ought to be in. The authors conjecture that all and only practical reasons are authoritative. Hence, in one important sense, all reasons for belief are practical reasons. But this account also preserves the autonomy and importance of epistemic reasons.
Metadata
Item Type: | Article |
---|---|
Authors/Creators: |
|
Copyright, Publisher and Additional Information: | © 2020 by Cornell University. This is an author produced version of an article published in The Philosophical Review. Uploaded in accordance with the publisher's self-archiving policy. |
Keywords: | Pragmatism, evidentialism, wrong kind of reasons, ethics of activities, authoritative normativity |
Dates: |
|
Institution: | The University of Leeds |
Academic Units: | The University of Leeds > Faculty of Arts, Humanities and Cultures (Leeds) > School of Philosophy, Religion and History of Science (Leeds) > School of Philosophy (Leeds) |
Depositing User: | Symplectic Publications |
Date Deposited: | 02 May 2019 11:29 |
Last Modified: | 13 May 2020 13:50 |
Status: | Published |
Publisher: | Duke University Press |
Identification Number: | 10.1215/00318108-8012843 |
Open Archives Initiative ID (OAI ID): | oai:eprints.whiterose.ac.uk:145605 |