On Two Arguments for Fanaticism

Noûs (2023)
  Copy   BIBTEX

Abstract

Should we make significant sacrifices to ever-so-slightly lower the chance of extremely bad outcomes, or to ever-so-slightly raise the chance of extremely good outcomes? *Fanaticism* says yes: for every bad outcome, there is a tiny chance of extreme disaster that is even worse, and for every good outcome, there is a tiny chance of an enormous good that is even better. I consider two related recent arguments for Fanaticism: Beckstead and Thomas's argument from *strange dependence on space and time*, and Wilkinson's *Indology* argument. While both arguments are instructive, neither is persuasive. In fact, the general principles that underwrite the arguments (a *separability* principle in the first case, and a *reflection* principle in the second) are *inconsistent* with Fanaticism. In both cases, though, it is possible to rehabilitate arguments for Fanaticism based on restricted versions of those principles. The situation is unstable: plausible general principles tell *against* Fanaticism, but restrictions of those same principles (with strengthened auxiliary assumptions) *support* Fanaticism. All of the consistent views that emerge are very strange.

Similar books and articles

An Introduction to the Philosophy of Fanaticism.Paul Katsafanas - 2023 - In Fanaticism and the History of Philosophy. London: Rewriting the History of Philosophy. pp. 1-18.
Fanaticism, toleration and philosophy.John Passmore - 2003 - Journal of Political Philosophy 11 (2):211–222.
Fanaticism and the History of Philosophy.Paul Katsafanas (ed.) - 2023 - London: Rewriting the History of Philosophy.
To Have Done with the Philosophical Cold War.Rodrigo Nunes - 2016 - Historical Materialism 24 (3):226-240.
Fanaticism in the manosphere.Mark Alfano & Paul-Mikhail Podosky - 2023 - In Paul Katsafanas (ed.), Fanaticism and the History of Philosophy. London: Rewriting the History of Philosophy.
In Defense of Fanaticism.Hayden Wilkinson - 2022 - Ethics 132 (2):445-477.
Act utilitarianism and the moral fanaticism argument.Mark Timmons - 1984 - Philosophical Studies 46 (2):215 - 226.
The Phenomenon of Fanaticism.Zofia Rosińska & Grzegorz Czemiel - 2020 - Dialogue and Universalism 30 (2):159-164.
Fanaticism as a Worldview.Frank Chouraqui - 2019 - Philosophical Journal of Conflict and Violence 3 (1).
I. on the alleged inconsistency, moral insensitivity and fanaticism of pacifism.Richard Routley - 1984 - Inquiry: An Interdisciplinary Journal of Philosophy 27 (1-4):117 – 136.
Group fanaticism and narratives of ressentiment.Paul Katsafanas - 2022 - In Leo Townsend, Ruth Rebecca Tietjen, Michael Staudigl & Hans Bernard Schmid (eds.), The Philosophy of Fanaticism: Epistemic, Affective, and Political Dimensions. London: Routledge.

Analytics

Added to PP
2021-11-09

Downloads
923 (#15,574)

6 months
311 (#6,834)

Historical graph of downloads
How can I increase my downloads?

Author's Profile

Jeffrey Sanford Russell
University of Southern California

Citations of this work

Fixing Stochastic Dominance.Jeffrey Sanford Russell - forthcoming - The British Journal for the Philosophy of Science.

View all 9 citations / Add more citations