Ought to believe, simpliciter

1Citations
Citations of this article
5Readers
Mendeley users who have this article in their library.

Abstract

According to many philosophers there are only pro tanto oughts to believe relative to a standard of assessment: there are epistemic oughts to believe, moral oughts to believe, prudential oughts to believe etc. But there are no oughts to believe simpliciter. Many of the same philosophers who hold this view, also hold that ought to believe is to be understood deontologically – such that if S violates such an ought without excuse, S is blameworthy for doing so. I here argue that on a deontological understanding of ought to believe there must be ought to believe simpliciter and that it is the violation of this ought that determines whether we are to blame for our beliefs.

Cite

CITATION STYLE

APA

Booth, A. R. (2024). Ought to believe, simpliciter. Episteme, 21(2), 358–370. https://doi.org/10.1017/epi.2021.53

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