Reducing Responsibility: An Evidentialist Account of Epistemic Blame

European Journal of Philosophy 20 (4):534-547 (2012)

Abstract

Abstract: This paper argues that instances of what are typically called ‘epistemic irresponsibility’ are better understood as instances of moral or prudenial failure. This hypothesis covers the data and is simpler than postulating a new sui generis form of normativitiy. The irresponsibility alleged is that embeded in charges of ‘You should have known better!’ However, I argue, either there is some interest at stake in knowing or there is not. If there is not, then there is no irresponsibility. If there is, it is either the inquirer's interests—in which case it is a prudential shortcoming—or someone else's interests are at stake—in which case it is a moral shortcoming. In no case, I argue, is there any need to postulate a form of normativity in epistemology other than the traditional epistemological norm that one's attitudes should fit the evidence one has.

Download options

PhilArchive



    Upload a copy of this work     Papers currently archived: 72,855

External links

Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server

Through your library

Analytics

Added to PP
2010-07-08

Downloads
183 (#66,238)

6 months
2 (#257,917)

Historical graph of downloads
How can I increase my downloads?

Author's Profile

Trent Dougherty
University of Rochester (PhD)

References found in this work

Thought.Gilbert Harman - 1973 - Princeton, NJ, USA: Princeton University Press.
Epistemology of Disagreement: The Good News.David Christensen - 2007 - Philosophical Review 116 (2):187-217.
Evidentialism.Richard Feldman & Earl Conee - 1985 - Philosophical Studies 48 (1):15 - 34.
The Epistemic Significance of Disagreement.Thomas Kelly - 2005 - In Tamar Szabó Gendler & John Hawthorne (eds.), Oxford Studies in Epistemology, Volume 1. Oxford/New York: Oxford University Press. pp. 167-196.

View all 39 references / Add more references

Citations of this work

There is a Distinctively Epistemic Kind of Blame.Cameron Boult - 2021 - Philosophy and Phenomenological Research 103 (3):518-534.
Should Have Known.Sanford C. Goldberg - 2017 - Synthese 194 (8):2863-2894.
Epistemic Blame.Cameron Boult - 2021 - Philosophy Compass 16 (8):e12762.
Respect and the reality of apparent reasons.Kurt L. Sylvan - 2021 - Philosophical Studies 178 (10):3129-3156.
Standing to Epistemically Blame.Cameron Boult - 2021 - Synthese 199 (3-4):11355-11375.

View all 15 citations / Add more citations

Similar books and articles

Recovering Responsibility.Guy Axtell - 2011 - Logos and Episteme 2 (3):429-454.
Evidentialism Versus Faith.John Zeis - 2010 - Social Epistemology 24 (1):1 – 13.
Evidentialism and Faith: Believing in Order to Know.John Zeis - 2006 - Proceedings of the American Catholic Philosophical Association 80:185-200.
Evidentialism and Faith: Believing in Order to Know.John Zeis - 2006 - Proceedings of the American Catholic Philosophical Association 80:185-200.
Epistemic Responsibility.J. Angelo Corlett - 2008 - International Journal of Philosophical Studies 16 (2):179 – 200.
Implanted Desires, Self-Formation and Blame.Matthew Talbert - 2009 - Journal of Ethics and Social Philosophy 3 (2):1-18.