Banks, Bosses, and Bears: A Pragmatist Argument Against Encroachment

نویسندگان

چکیده

The pragmatism—anti-pragmatism debate concerns whether practical considerations can constitute genuinely normative wrong-kind reasons (WKRs) for and against doxastic attitudes, whereas the encroachment—anti-encroachment affect what right-kind (RKRs) one has or needs to have in order enjoy some epistemic status. While these are two separate issues, my main aim is show that pragmatists a plausible debunking explanation offer of encroachment cases: cases only generate WKRs belief, rather than RKRs have, so agents ought withhold but all-things-considered sense. Moreover, I argue pragmatist debunker's what's going on more encroacher's because they're structurally identical involving other attitudes like admiration fear. These analogous WKR-cases not support surprising conclusion should be anti-encroachers, they also challenge view independently pragmatism true.

برای دانلود باید عضویت طلایی داشته باشید

برای دانلود متن کامل این مقاله و بیش از 32 میلیون مقاله دیگر ابتدا ثبت نام کنید

اگر عضو سایت هستید لطفا وارد حساب کاربری خود شوید

منابع مشابه

Between Bosses and Boosters:

The study of leadership has become a serious industry in America in the past decade. It shows activities on commercial and academic levels resulting in the publication of hundreds of how-to-become-a-leader guides per year and more than 1,000 degree programs. A four-volume Encyclopedia of Leadership seeks to mark the transition of the study of leadership from a specialist hobby to a mature acade...

متن کامل

A Kantian argument against abortion.

JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact [email protected]. .

متن کامل

Against the Vagueness Argument

In this paper I offer a counterexample to the so called vagueness argument against restricted composition. This will be done in the lines of a recent suggestion by Trenton Merricks, namely by challenging the claim that there cannot be a sharp cut-off point in a composition sequence. It will be suggested that causal powers which emerge when composition occurs can serve as an indicator of such sh...

متن کامل

An Argument against Epiphenomenalism

_________________________________________________ I formulate an argument against epiphenomenalism; the argument shows that epiphenomenalism is extremely improbable. Moreover the argument suggests that qualia not only have causal powers, but have their causal powers necessarily. I address possible objections and then conclude by considering some implications the argument has for dualism.

متن کامل

ذخیره در منابع من


  با ذخیره ی این منبع در منابع من، دسترسی به آن را برای استفاده های بعدی آسان تر کنید

ژورنال

عنوان ژورنال: Philosophy and Phenomenological Research

سال: 2021

ISSN: ['0031-8205', '1933-1592']

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/phpr.12840