Pacific Philosophical Quarterly 82 (2):157–177 (2001)

Authors
Simon Evnine
University of Miami
Abstract
I argue that it is not ideally rational to believe that some of one's current beliefs are false, despite the impressive inductive evidence concerning others and our former selves. One's own current beliefs represent a commitment which would be undermined by taking some of them to be false. The nature of this commitment is examined in the light of Nagel's distinction between subjective and objective points of view. Finally, I suggest how we might acknowledge our fallibility consistently with this special attitude to our own beliefs.
Keywords fallibility  belief  Preface
Categories (categorize this paper)
DOI 10.1111/1468-0114.00123
Options
Edit this record
Mark as duplicate
Export citation
Find it on Scholar
Request removal from index
Revision history

Download options

PhilArchive copy


Upload a copy of this paper     Check publisher's policy     Papers currently archived: 70,265
External links

Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server
Configure custom proxy (use this if your affiliation does not provide a proxy)
Through your library

References found in this work BETA

No references found.

Add more references

Citations of this work BETA

Naturalism, Fallibilism, and the a Priori.Lisa Warenski - 2009 - Philosophical Studies 142 (3):403-426.
Rationality and Judgment.Harvey Siegel - 2004 - Metaphilosophy 35 (5):597-613.
Epistemic Unities.Simon J. Evnine - 2003 - Erkenntnis 59 (3):365 - 388.
Some Formal Semantics for Epistemic Modesty.Christopher Steinsvold - 2020 - Logic and Logical Philosophy 29 (3):381-413.

View all 6 citations / Add more citations

Similar books and articles

Analytics

Added to PP index
2009-01-28

Total views
84 ( #138,564 of 2,507,669 )

Recent downloads (6 months)
3 ( #209,530 of 2,507,669 )

How can I increase my downloads?

Downloads

My notes