Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-gbm5v Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-23T15:32:08.542Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Autonomy, Agency, and the Value of Enduring Beliefs

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  01 January 2020

Jason Kawall
Jason Kawall*
Affiliation:
Colgate University, Hamilton, NY13346-1398, USA
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

There has been much recent interest in questions of value in epistemology (for a thorough overview of this work, see Pritchard 2007), and in what follows I argue that epistemologists concerned with the value of true beliefs and knowledge would do well to devote attention to the enduring nature of beliefs, and in particular to the essential role that they play in constituting agents themselves.

I begin by considering an analogy commonly drawn by epistemologists between acts in the domain of ethics and beliefs in the domain of epistemology, and argue that it is fl awed in important respects. I propose that a better, more fruitful analogue for belief would be desire, or a similarly enduring state of an agent. This revision of a commonly used analogy may be of some value in itself, but I further consider how focusing excessively upon the belief-act analogy (with its implicit emphasis on the process of belief-formation) can lead to flaws or shortcomings in our epistemic value theorizing.

Type
Research Article
Information
Canadian Journal of Philosophy , Volume 40 , Issue 1 , March 2010 , pp. 107 - 129
Copyright
Copyright © The Authors 2010

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Adler, J. 2002. Belief's Own Ethics. Cambridge: MIT Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Aristotle, . 1985. Nicomachean Ethics. Irwin, Terence trans. Indianapolis: Hackett.Google Scholar
Audi, R. 1994. ‘Dispositional Beliefs and Dispositions to Believe.’ Noûs 28: 419–34.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Axtell, G. ed. 2001. Knowledge, Belief, and Character. Lanham, MD: Rowman & Littlefield.Google Scholar
Christman, J. 1991. ‘Autonomy and Personal History.’ Canadian Journal of Philosophy 21: 1–24.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cox, D. Caze, M. La & Levine, M.. 2005. ‘Integrity.’ In The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy (Fall 2005 Edition), E. Zalta, ed. <http://plato.stanford.edu/archives/fall2005/entries/integrity>..>Google Scholar
David, M. 2001. ‘Truth as the Epistemic Goal.’ in Knowledge, Truth, and Duty: Essays on Epistemic Justification, Responsibility, and Virtue. Steup, M. ed. New York: Oxford University Press. 151–69.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dworkin, G. 1988. The Theory and Practice of Autonomy. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Feldman, R. 1988. ‘Subjective and Objective Justification in Ethics and Epistemology.’ The Monist 71: 405–19.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Feldman, R. 2001. ‘Voluntary Belief and Epistemic Evaluation.’ in Knowledge, Truth, and Duty: Essays on Epistemic Justification, Responsibility, and Virtue. Steup, M. ed. New York: Oxford University Press. 77–92.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Feinberg, J. 1986. Harm to Self. New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Firth, R. 1998. ‘Epistemic Merit, Intrinsic and Instrumental.’ In In Defense of Radical Empiricism: Essays and Lectures by Roderick Firth. Troyer, J. ed. Lanham, MD: Rowman & Littlefield.Google Scholar
Goldman, A and E., Olsson. forthcoming. ‘Reliabilism and the Value of Knowledge.’ In Epistemic Value. Pritchard, D. Millar, A. and Haddock, A. eds. New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Greco, J. 2000. Putting Skeptics in Their Place: The Nature of Skeptical Arguments. New York: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Greco, J. 2003. ‘Knowledge as Credit for True Belief.’ In Intellectual Virtue. DePaul, M. and Zagzebski, L. eds. New York: Oxford University Press. 111–34.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Humberstone, L. 1992. ‘Direction of Fit.’ Mind 101: 59–83.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kane, R. 1996. The Significance of Free Will. New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Kawall, J. 2002. ‘Other-Regarding Epistemic Virtues.’ Ratio 15: 257–75.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kornblith, H. 2002. Knowledge and its Place in Nature. New York: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kvanvig, J.L. 2003. The Value of Knowledge and the Pursuit of Understanding. New York: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mele, A. 1995. Autonomous Agents: From Self-Control to Autonomy. New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Montmarquet, J.A. 1993. Epistemic Virtue and Doxastic Responsibility. Lanham, MD: Rowman & Littlefield.Google Scholar
Morton, A. 2006. ‘Knowing What to Think about: When Epistemology Meets the Theory of Choice.’ In Epistemology Futures. Hetherington, S. ed. New York: Oxford University Press. 111–30.Google Scholar
Parfit, D. 1984. Reasons and Persons. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Pritchard, D. 2007. ‘Recent Work on Epistemic Value.’ American Philosophical Quarterly 44: 85–110.Google Scholar
Russell, B. 2001. ‘Epistemic and Moral Duty.’ In Knowledge, Truth, and Duty: Essays on Epistemic Justification, Responsibility, and Virtue. Steup, M. ed. New York: Oxford University Press. 34–48.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Schwitzgebel, E. 2002. ‘A Phenomenal, Dispositional Account of Belief.’ Noûs 36: 249–75.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sosa, E. 1991. Knowledge in Perspective: Selected Essays in Epistemology. New York: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sosa, E. 2003. ‘The Place of Truth in Epistemology.’ in Intellectual Virtue. DePaul, M. and Zagzebski, L. eds. New York: Oxford University Press. 155–79.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Steup, M. 2000. ‘Doxastic Voluntarism and Epistemic Deontology.’ Acta Analytica 15: 25–56.Google Scholar
Steup, M. 2001. ‘Epistemic Duty, Evidence, and Internality.’ In Knowledge, Truth, and Duty: Essays on Epistemic Justification, Responsibility, and Virtue. Steup, M. ed. New York: Oxford University Press. 134–48.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Williams, B. 1981a. ‘Persons, Character, and Morality.’ In Moral Luck: Philosophical Papers 1973-1980. Williams, B. ed. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Williams, B. 1981b. ‘Utilitarianism and Moral Self-Indulgence.’ In Moral Luck: Philosophical Papers 1973-1980. Williams, B. ed. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Williamson, T. 2000. Knowledge and its Limits. New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Zagzebski, L. 1996. Virtues of the Mind: An Inquiry into the Nature of Virtue and the Ethical Foundations of Knowledge. New York: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Zagzebski, L. 2000. ‘From Reliabilism to Virtue Epistemology.’ In Knowledge, Belief, and Character. Axtell, G. ed. Lanham, MD: Rowman & Littlefield. 113–22.Google Scholar
Zagzebski, L. 2003a. ‘The Search for the Source of Epistemic Good.’ In Moral & Epistemic Virtues. Brady, M. and D., Pritchard eds. Malden, MA: Blackwell. 13–28.Google Scholar
Zagzebski, L. 2003b. ‘Intellectual Motivation and the Good of Truth.’ In Intellectual Virtue. DePaul, M. and Zagzebski, L. eds. New York: Oxford University Press. 135–54.CrossRefGoogle Scholar