We present an argument against a standard evidentialist position on the ethics of belief. We argue that sometimes a person merits criticism for holding a belief even when that belief is well supported by her evidence in any relevant sense. We show how our argument advances the case for anti-evidentialism (pragmatism) in the light of other arguments presented in the recent literature, and respond to a set of possible evidentialist rejoinders
Evidentialism is the view that facts about whether or not an agent is justified in having a particul...
Evidentialism is the thesis that all reasons to believe p are evidence for p. Pragmatists hold that ...
Moral encroachment holds that the epistemic justification of a belief can be affected by moral facto...
We present an argument against a standard evidentialist position on the ethics of belief. We argue t...
We present an argument against a standard evidentialist position on the ethics of belief. We argue t...
The question of whether it is ever permissible to believe on insufficient evidence has once again be...
The ethics of belief is concerned with the question of what we should believe. According to evidenti...
This paper is a defense of moral evidentialism, the view that we have a moral obligation to form the...
We generally consider that we should not believe on the basis of insufficient evidence. Yet there ar...
The existing philosophical debate about the nature of reasons for belief between pragmatists and evi...
In this thesis, I raise considerations against some arguments that support evidentialism, the view t...
This chapter examines an evidentialist ethics of belief, and W. K. Clifford’s proposal in particular...
A popular evidentialist argument against pragmatism is based on reason internalism: the view that a ...
Some prominent evidentialists argue that practical considerations cannot be normative reasons for be...
Evidentialism is the view that facts about whether or not an agent is justified in having a particul...
Evidentialism is the thesis that all reasons to believe p are evidence for p. Pragmatists hold that ...
Moral encroachment holds that the epistemic justification of a belief can be affected by moral facto...
We present an argument against a standard evidentialist position on the ethics of belief. We argue t...
We present an argument against a standard evidentialist position on the ethics of belief. We argue t...
The question of whether it is ever permissible to believe on insufficient evidence has once again be...
The ethics of belief is concerned with the question of what we should believe. According to evidenti...
This paper is a defense of moral evidentialism, the view that we have a moral obligation to form the...
We generally consider that we should not believe on the basis of insufficient evidence. Yet there ar...
The existing philosophical debate about the nature of reasons for belief between pragmatists and evi...
In this thesis, I raise considerations against some arguments that support evidentialism, the view t...
This chapter examines an evidentialist ethics of belief, and W. K. Clifford’s proposal in particular...
A popular evidentialist argument against pragmatism is based on reason internalism: the view that a ...
Some prominent evidentialists argue that practical considerations cannot be normative reasons for be...
Evidentialism is the view that facts about whether or not an agent is justified in having a particul...
Evidentialism is the thesis that all reasons to believe p are evidence for p. Pragmatists hold that ...
Moral encroachment holds that the epistemic justification of a belief can be affected by moral facto...