Synthese 190 (18):4065-4075 (2013)

Authors
Scott Stapleford
St. Thomas University
Abstract
Mark Nelson argues that we have no positive epistemic duties. His case rests on the evidential inexhaustibility of sensory and propositional evidence—what he calls their ‘infinite justificational fecundity’. It is argued here that Nelson’s reflections on the richness of sensory and propositional evidence do make it doubtful that we ever have an epistemic duty to add any particular beliefs to our belief set, but that they fail to establish that we have no positive epistemic duties whatsoever. A theory of epistemic obligation based on Kant’s idea of an imperfect duty is outlined. It is suggested that such a theory is consistent with the inexhaustibility of sensory and propositional evidence. Finally, one feature of our epistemic practice suggestive of the existence of imperfect epistemic duties is identified and promoted
Keywords Epistemic deontologism  Ethics of belief  Evidence  Imperfect duties  Justification
Categories (categorize this paper)
ISBN(s)
DOI 10.1007/s11229-013-0249-5
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: 65,740
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

Evidentialism: Essays in Epistemology.Earl Brink Conee & Richard Feldman - 2004 - Oxford, England: Oxford University Press.
We Have No Positive Epistemic Duties.Mark Nelson - 2010 - Mind 119 (473):83-102.
Having Evidence.Richard Feldman - 1988 - In D. F. Austin (ed.), Philosophical Analysis. Kluwer Academic Publishers. pp. 83--104.

View all 10 references / Add more references

Citations of this work BETA

Dilemmic Epistemology.Nick Hughes - 2019 - Synthese 196 (10):4059-4090.
The Duty to Object.Jennifer Lackey - 2018 - Philosophy and Phenomenological Research 101 (1):35-60.
Intraspecies Impermissivism.Scott Stapleford - 2018 - Episteme 16 (3):340-356.

View all 9 citations / Add more citations

Similar books and articles

We Have No Positive Epistemic Duties.Mark Nelson - 2010 - Mind 119 (473):83-102.
Epistemic Duties and Failure to Understand One’s Evidence.Scott Stapleford - 2012 - Principia: An International Journal of Epistemology 16 (1):147-177.
Why There Are No Epistemic Duties.Chase B. Wrenn - 2007 - Dialogue: The Canadian Philosophical Review 46 (1):115-136.
Epistemic Responsibility.J. Angelo Corlett - 2008 - International Journal of Philosophical Studies 16 (2):179 – 200.
The Imperfect Nature of Corporate Responsibilities to Stakeholders.David Lea - 2004 - Business Ethics Quarterly 14 (2):201-217.
Higher Order Evidence.David Christensen - 2010 - Philosophy and Phenomenological Research 81 (1):185-215.
Subsistence Needs, Human Rights, and Imperfect Duties.Simon Hope - 2013 - Journal of Applied Philosophy 30 (1):88-100.
Experts, Evidence, and Epistemic Independence.Ben Almassi - 2007 - Spontaneous Generations 1 (1):58-66.

Analytics

Added to PP index
2013-02-13

Total views
100 ( #111,100 of 2,462,827 )

Recent downloads (6 months)
6 ( #119,641 of 2,462,827 )

How can I increase my downloads?

Downloads

My notes