Objective content. Does 'belief-holism' show that reductive dispositionalism about content could not be true? II - Alexander Miller

1Citations
Citations of this article
3Readers
Mendeley users who have this article in their library.
Get full text

Abstract

Paul Boghossian (1989, 1990) has argued, on grounds concerning the holistic nature of belief fixation, that there are principled reasons for thinking that 'optimal conditions' versions of reductive dispositionalism about content cannot hope to satisfy a condition of extensional accuracy. I discern three separable strands of argument in Boghossian's work - the circularity objection, the open-endedness objection, and the certification objection - and argue that each of these objections fails. My conclusion is that for all that Boghossian has shown, 'optimal conditions' versions of reductive dispositionalism have to be assessed on a case-by-case basis.

Cite

CITATION STYLE

APA

Weir, A., & Miller, A. (2003). Objective content. Does “belief-holism” show that reductive dispositionalism about content could not be true? II - Alexander Miller. Proceedings of the Aristotelean Society, Supplementary Volumes, 77(1), 73–90. https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-8349.00103

Register to see more suggestions

Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.

Already have an account?

Save time finding and organizing research with Mendeley

Sign up for free