38 found
Order:
Disambiguations
Chris Tucker [35]Christopher Tucker [3]Christine Tucker [1]Christopher Miles Tucker [1]
See also
Chris Tucker
William & Mary
  1. Why Open-Minded People Should Endorse Dogmatism.Chris Tucker - 2010 - Philosophical Perspectives 24 (1):529-545.
    Open-minded people should endorse dogmatism because of its explanatory power. Dogmatism holds that, in the absence of defeaters, a seeming that P necessarily provides non-inferential justification for P. I show that dogmatism provides an intuitive explanation of four issues concerning non-inferential justification. It is particularly impressive that dogmatism can explain these issues because prominent epistemologists have argued that it can’t address at least two of them. Prominent epistemologists also object that dogmatism is absurdly permissive because it allows a seeming to (...)
    Direct download (4 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   127 citations  
  2. Seemings and Justification: New Essays on Dogmatism and Phenomenal Conservatism.Chris Tucker (ed.) - 2013 - Oxford University Press USA.
    The primary aim of this book is to understand how seemings relate to justification and whether some version of dogmatism or phenomenal conservatism can be sustained. It also addresses a number of other issues, including the nature of seemings, cognitive penetration, Bayesianism, and the epistemology of morality and disagreement.
    Direct download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   42 citations  
  3. Seemings and Justification: An Introduction.Chris Tucker - 2013 - In Seemings and Justification: New Essays on Dogmatism and Phenomenal Conservatism. Oxford University Press. pp. 1-29.
    It is natural to think that many of our beliefs are rational because they are based on seemings, or on the way things seem. This is especially clear in the case of perception. Many of our mathematical, moral, and memory beliefs also appear to be based on seemings. In each of these cases, it is natural to think that our beliefs are not only based on a seeming, but also that they are rationally based on these seemings—at least assuming there (...)
    Direct download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   51 citations  
  4. When Transmission Fails.Chris Tucker - 2010 - Philosophical Review 119 (4):497-529.
    The Neo-Moorean Deduction (I have a hand, so I am not a brain-in-a-vat) and the Zebra Deduction (the creature is a zebra, so isn’t a cleverly disguised mule) are notorious. Crispin Wright, Martin Davies, Fred Dretske, and Brian McLaughlin, among others, argue that these deductions are instances of transmission failure. That is, they argue that these deductions cannot transmit justification to their conclusions. I contend, however, that the notoriety of these deductions is undeserved. My strategy is to clarify, attack, defend, (...)
    Direct download (9 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   67 citations  
  5. If Dogmatists Have a Problem with Cognitive Penetration, You Do Too.Chris Tucker - 2014 - Dialectica 68 (1):35-62.
    Perceptual dogmatism holds that if it perceptually seems to S that P, then S thereby has prima facie perceptual justification for P. But suppose Wishful Willy's desire for gold cognitively penetrates his perceptual experience and makes it seem to him that the yellow object is a gold nugget. Intuitively, his desire-penetrated seeming can't provide him with prima facie justification for thinking that the object is gold. If this intuitive response is correct, dogmatists have a problem. But if dogmatists have a (...)
    Direct download (3 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   15 citations  
  6. Weighing Reasons Against.Chris Tucker - forthcoming - Oxford Studies in Metaethics.
    Ethicists increasingly reject the scale as a useful metaphor for weighing reasons. Yet they generally retain the metaphor of a reason’s weight. This combination is incoherent. The metaphor of weight entails a very specific scale-based model of weighing reasons, Dual Scale. Justin Snedegar worries that scale-based models of weighing reasons can’t properly weigh reasons against an option. I show that there are, in fact, two different reasons for/against distinctions, and I provide an account of the relationship between the various kinds (...)
    Direct download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   1 citation  
  7. Satisficing and Motivated Submaximization (in the Philosophy of Religion).Chris Tucker - 2016 - Philosophy and Phenomenological Research 93 (1):127-143.
    In replying to certain objections to the existence of God, Robert Adams, Bruce Langtry, and Peter van Inwagen assume that God can appropriately choose a suboptimal world, a world less good than some other world God could have chosen. A number of philosophers, such as Michael Slote and Klaas Kraay, claim that these theistic replies are therefore committed to the claim that satisficing can be appropriate. Kraay argues that this commitment is a significant liability. I argue, however, that the relevant (...)
    Direct download (3 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   9 citations  
  8. Phenomenal Conservatism and Evidentialism in Religious Epistemology.Chris Tucker - 2011 - In Kelly James Clark & Raymond J. VanArragon (eds.), Evidence and Religious Belief. Oxford University Press. pp. 52--73.
    Phenomenal conservatism holds, roughly, that if it seems to S that P, then S has evidence for P. I argue for two main conclusions. The first is that phenomenal conservatism is better suited than is proper functionalism to explain how a particular type of religious belief formation can lead to non-inferentially justified religious beliefs. The second is that phenomenal conservatism makes evidence so easy to obtain that the truth of evidentialism would not be a significant obstacle to justified religious belief. (...)
    Direct download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   23 citations  
  9. Acquaintance and Fallible Non-Inferential Justification.Chris Tucker - 2016 - In Michael Bergmann & Brett Coppenger (eds.), Intellectual Assurance: Essays on Traditional Epistemic Internalism. Oxford University Press. pp. 43-60.
    Classical acquaintance theory is any version of classical foundationalism that appeals to acquaintance in order to account for non-inferential justification. Such theories are well suited to account for a kind of infallible non-inferential justification. Why am I justified in believing that I’m in pain? An initially attractive (partial) answer is that I’m acquainted with my pain. But since I can’t be acquainted with what isn’t there, acquaintance with my pain guarantees that I’m in pain. What’s less clear is whether, given (...)
    Direct download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   9 citations  
  10. How to Explain Miscomputation.Chris Tucker - 2018 - Philosophers' Imprint 18:1-17.
    Just as theory of representation is deficient if it can’t explain how misrepresentation is possible, a theory of computation is deficient if it can’t explain how miscomputation is possible. Nonetheless, philosophers have generally ignored miscomputation. My primary goal in this paper is to clarify both what miscomputation is and how to adequately explain it. Miscomputation is a special kind of malfunction: a system miscomputes when it computes in a way that it shouldn’t. To explain miscomputation, you must provide accounts of (...)
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   5 citations  
  11. Movin' on Up: Higher-Level Requirements and Inferential Justification.Chris Tucker - 2012 - Philosophical Studies 157 (3):323-340.
    Does inferential justification require the subject to be aware that her premises support her conclusion? Externalists tend to answer “no” and internalists tend to answer “yes”. In fact, internalists often hold the strong higher-level requirement that an argument justifies its conclusion only if the subject justifiably believes that her premises support her conclusion. I argue for a middle ground. Against most externalists, I argue that inferential justification requires that one be aware that her premises support her conclusion. Against many internalists, (...)
    Direct download (5 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   16 citations  
  12.  71
    Too Far Beyond the Call of Duty: Moral Rationalism and Weighing Reasons.Chris Tucker - forthcoming - Philosophical Studies:1-24.
    The standard account of supererogation holds that Liv is not morally required to jump on a grenade, thereby sacrificing her life, to save the lives of five soldiers. Many proponents defend the standard account by appealing to moral rationalism about requirement. These same proponents hold that Bernie is morally permitted to jump on a grenade, thereby sacrificing his life, to spare someone a mild burn. I argue that this position is unstable, at least as moral rationalism is ordinarily defended. The (...)
    Direct download (3 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  13. Divine Satisficing and the Ethics of the Problem of Evil.Chris Tucker - 2020 - Faith and Philosophy 37 (1):32-56.
    This paper accomplishes three goals. First, it reveals that God’s ethics has a radical satisficing structure: God can choose a good enough suboptimal option even if there is a best option and no countervailing considerations. Second, it resolves the long-standing worry that there is no account of the good enough that is both principled and demanding enough to be good enough. Third, it vindicates the key ethical assumption in the problem of evil without relying on the contested assumption that God’s (...)
    Direct download (4 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   1 citation  
  14. Divine Hiddenness and the Value of Divine–Creature Relationships.Chris Tucker - 2008 - Religious Studies 44 (3):269-287.
    Apparently, relationships between God (if He exists) and His creatures would be very valuable. Appreciating this value raises the question of whether it can motivate a certain premise in John Schellenberg’s argument from divine hiddenness, a premise which claims, roughly, that if some capable, non-resistant subject fails to believe in God, then God does not exist. In this paper, I argue that the value of divine–creature relationships can justify this premise only if we have reason to believe that the counterfactuals (...)
    Direct download (7 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   10 citations  
  15. How to Think About Satisficing.Chris Tucker - 2017 - Philosophical Studies 174 (6):1365-1384.
    An agent submaximizes with motivation when she aims at the best but chooses a less good option because of a countervailing consideration. An agent satisfices when she rejects the better for the good enough, and does so because the mere good enough gets her what she really wants. Motivated submaximization and satisficing, so construed, are different ways of choosing a suboptimal option, but this difference is easily missed. Putative proponents of satisficing tend to argue only that motivated submaximization can be (...)
    Direct download (4 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   2 citations  
  16. On What Inferentially Justifies What: The Vices of Reliabilism and Proper Functionalism.Chris Tucker - 2014 - Synthese 191 (14):3311-3328.
    We commonly say that some evidence supports a hypothesis or that some premise evidentially supports a conclusion. Both internalists and externalists attempt to analyze this notion of evidential support, and the primary purpose of this paper is to argue that reliabilist and proper functionalist accounts of this relation fail. Since evidential support is one component of inferential justification, the upshot of this failure is that their accounts of inferential justification also fail. In Sect. 2, I clarify the evidential support relation. (...)
    Direct download (3 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   3 citations  
  17. A Guide to Constructive Disagreement.Chris Tucker - manuscript
    Philosophers use disagreement as a way to discover truth. It is constructive. It can lead one to refine one's own position and/or better understand the opposing position. When you are comfortable with the people you disagree with, it can be a fun way to learn. It can even build community. Yet students often see disagreement as divisive. There are winners and losers, and it's not much fun when you are losing. Rarely do students actively use it as a tool for (...)
    Direct download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  18. Transmission and Transmission Failure in Epistemology.Chris Tucker - 2010 - Internet Encyclopedia of Philosophy.
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   7 citations  
  19. Perceptual Justification and Warrant by Default.Chris Tucker - 2009 - Australasian Journal of Philosophy 87: 445-63 87 (3):445-63.
    As I use the term, ‘entitlement’ is any warrant one has by default—i.e. without acquiring it. Some philosophers not only affirm the existence of entitlement, but also give it a crucial role in the justification of our perceptual beliefs. These philosophers affirm the Entitlement Thesis: An essential part of what makes our perceptual beliefs justified is our entitlement to the proposition that I am not a brain-in-a-vat. Crispin Wright, Stewart Cohen, and Roger White are among those who endorse this controversial (...)
    Direct download (3 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   5 citations  
  20. The Dual Scale Model of Weighing Reasons.Chris Tucker - forthcoming - Noûs.
    The metaphor of weighing reasons brings to mind a single (double-pan balance) scale. The reasons for φ go in one pan and the reasons for ~φ go in the other. The relative weights, as indicated by the relative heights of the two pans of the scale, determine the deontic status of φ. This model is simple and intuitive, but it cannot capture what it is to weigh reasons correctly. A reason pushes the φ pan down toward permissibility (has justifying weight) (...)
    Direct download (3 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  21.  44
    Beastly Contractarianism? A Contractarian Analysis of the Possibility of Animal Rights.Chris Tucker & Chris MacDonald - 2004 - Essays in Philosophy 5 (2):31.
    Social Contract theorists and animal advocates seem to have agreed to go their separate ways. Contractarians have avoided attempting to address an issue that seems destined to prove embarrassing for the theory given the current political climate. It is largely thought that contractarianism affirms the meager moral standing commonly attributed to most animals. In the face of this consensus, animal advocates who feel the need to philosophically ground the moral status of animals have turned to other potential sources. This is (...)
    Direct download (3 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   5 citations  
  22. Agent Causation and the Alleged Impossibility of Rational Free Action.Chris Tucker - 2007 - Erkenntnis 67 (1):17 - 27.
    Galen Strawson has claimed that "the impossibility of free will and ultimate moral responsibility can be proved with complete certainty." Strawson, I take it, thinks that this conclusion can be established by one argument which he has developed. In this argument, he claims that rational free actions would require an infinite regress of rational choices, which is, of course, impossible for human beings. In my paper, I argue that agent causation theorists need not be worried by Strawson's argument. For agent (...)
    Direct download (5 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   3 citations  
  23. Why Sceptical Theism Isn’T Sceptical Enough.Chris Tucker - 2014 - In Trent Doughtery & Justin McBrayer (eds.), Skeptical Theism: New Essays. Oxford University Press. pp. 45-62.
    The most common charge against sceptical theism is that it is too sceptical, i.e. it committed to some undesirable form of scepticism or another. I contend that Michael Bergmann’s sceptical theism isn’t sceptical enough. I argue that, if true, the sceptical theses secure a genuine victory: they prevent, for some people, a prominent argument from evil from providing any justification whatsoever to doubt the existence of God. On the other hand, even if true, the sceptical theses fail to prevent even (...)
    Direct download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   1 citation  
  24. Evidential Support, Reliability, and Hume's Problem of Induction.Chris Tucker - 2009 - Pacific Philosophical Quarterly 90 (4):503-519.
    Necessity holds that, if a proposition A supports another B, then it must support B. John Greco contends that one can resolve Hume's Problem of Induction only if she rejects Necessity in favor of reliabilism. If Greco's contention is correct, we would have good reason to reject Necessity and endorse reliabilism about inferential justification. Unfortunately, Greco's contention is mistaken. I argue that there is a plausible reply to Hume's Problem that both endorses Necessity and is at least as good as (...)
    Direct download (4 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   2 citations  
  25. Experience as Evidence.Chris Tucker - forthcoming - In Maria Lasonen-Aarnio & Clayton M. Littlejohn (eds.), The Routledge Handbook of the Philosophy of Evidence. Routledge.
    This chapter explores whether and when experience can be evidence. It argues that experiences can be evidence, and that this claim is compatible with just about any epistemological theory. It evaluates the most promising argument for the conclusion that certain experiences (e.g., seeming to see) are always evidence for believing what the experiences represent. While the argument is very promising, one premise needs further defense. The argument also depends on a certain connection between reasonable belief and the first person perspective.
    Direct download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  26. Dogmatism and the Epistemology of Covert Selection.Chris Tucker - forthcoming - In Nathan Ballantyne & David Dunning (eds.), Reason, Bias, and Inquiry: New Perspectives from the Crossroads of Epistemology and Psychology. Oxford University Press.
    Perceptual dogmatism is a prominent theory in epistemology concerning the relationship between perceptual experience and reasonable belief. It holds that, in the absence of counterevidence, it is reasonable to believe what your perceptual experience tells you. Thus, if you are not aware of your experience’s casual history, then it doesn’t matter. Critics object that the causal history does matter: when a perceptual experience is caused in certain ways, it is unreasonable to trust what it tells you. These objections regularly appeal (...)
    Direct download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  27. The dangers of using safety to explain transmission failure: A reply to Martin Smith.Chris Tucker - 2012 - Episteme 9 (4):393-406.
    Many epistemologists hold that the Zebra Deduction fails to transmit knowledge to its conclusion, but there is little agreement concerning why it has this defect. A natural idea is, roughly, that it fails to transmit because it fails to improve the safety of its conclusion. In his ‘Transmission Failure Explained’, Martin Smith defends a transmission principle which is supposed to underwrite this natural idea. There are two problems with Smith's account. First, Smith's argument for his transmission principle relies on a (...)
    Direct download (8 more)  
    Translate
     
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  28.  54
    The Hiddenness Argument: Philosophy’s New Challenge to Belief in God, by J. L. Schellenberg. [REVIEW]Chris Tucker - 2016 - Faith and Philosophy 33 (4):500-506.
    I provide a book review of Schellenberg's book, The Hiddenness Argument.
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  29.  57
    No Justified Higher-Level Belief, No Problem: A Reply to Cling.Chris Tucker - 2011 - Journal of Philosophical Research 36:283-290.
    It is somewhat popular to claim that an argument justifies its conclusion only if the subject has a justified belief that the premise supports the conclusion. Andrew Cling gives a novel argument for this requirement, which he calls “(JCC).” He claims that any otherwise plausible theory that rejects (JCC) is committed to distinguishing arbitrarily between arguments that provide doxastic justification for their conclusions and those that don’t. In this paper, I show that Cling’s argument fails, and I explain how the (...)
    Direct download (3 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  30.  60
    Hermeneutics as a … Foundationalism?Chris Tucker - 2006 - Dialogue 45 (4):627-46.
    It is commonly assumed, at least by continental philosophers, that epistemological hermeneutics and foundationalism are incompatible. I argue that this assumption is mistaken. If I am correct, the analytic and continental traditions may be closer than is commonly supposed. Hermeneutics, as I will argue, is a descriptive claim about human cognition, and foundationalism is a normative claim about how beliefs ought to be related to one another. Once the positions are stated in this way, their putative incompatibility vanishes. Also, to (...)
    Direct download (4 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  31. Logi Gunnarsson, Making Moral Sense: Beyond Habermas and Gauthier. [REVIEW]Christopher Tucker - 2001 - Philosophy in Review 21:422-424.
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  32.  30
    Integration of Catholic Social Teaching at CRS.Christine Tucker - 2012 - Journal of Catholic Social Thought 9 (2):315-324.
  33. Logi Gunnarsson, Making Moral Sense: Beyond Habermas and Gauthier Reviewed By.Christopher Tucker - 2001 - Philosophy in Review 21 (6):422-424.
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  34.  45
    Harman Vs. Virtue Theory: Do Character Traits Explain Behavior?Chris Tucker - 2004 - Southwest Philosophy Review 21 (1):137-145.
    While there are alternative accounts, many virtue theories are character based, that is, they assert that the primary loci if moral evaluation are a person's character traits. According to these theories, any individual human being is good insogar as she possesses certain character traits, the virtues, and does not possess their antipodes, the vices. Gilbert Harman has attacked this view by citing evidence in empirical psychology that human behaviour is explained by situational factors to the exclusion of stable dispositions of (...)
    Direct download (3 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   1 citation  
  35.  11
    Contractarianism, Justification, and Relativity.Chris Tucker - 2003 - Dialogue 42 (3):559-.
    RÉSUMÉ: Une justification d’institutions morales ou politiques doit fournir aux gens une motivation pour agir en conformité avec ses diktats. Cela étant admis, je soutiens que le contractualisme est la seule méthode plausible par laquelle une telle justification puisse être fournie. Les contractualistes soutiennent que les institutions morales ou politiques sont justifiées dans la mesure où elles seraient le résultat d’une entente conclue par des agents rationnels. Les agents rationnels agissent de façon à maximiser leur utilité attendue. Lorsque tous les (...)
    Direct download (3 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  36.  28
    A Moral Obligation to Obey the State.Christopher Tucker - 2000 - Journal of Value Inquiry 34 (2/3):333-347.
    Direct download (3 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   1 citation  
  37.  6
    To Be a Citizen in the Third French Republic.Chris Tucker - 2004 - The European Legacy 9:537-540.
    Direct download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  38.  4
    Contractarianism, Justification, and Relativity.Chris Tucker - 2003 - Dialogue 42 (3):559-572.
    RÉSUMÉ: Une justification d’institutions morales ou politiques doit fournir aux gens une motivation pour agir en conformité avec ses diktats. Cela étant admis, je soutiens que le contractualisme est la seule méthode plausible par laquelle une telle justification puisse être fournie. Les contractualistes soutiennent que les institutions morales ou politiques sont justifiées dans la mesure où elles seraient le résultat d’une entente conclue par des agents rationnels. Les agents rationnels agissent de façon à maximiser leur utilité attendue. Lorsque tous les (...)
    No categories
    Direct download (3 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark