Is the Use of Evidence Necessary for the Justification of Beliefs?

Anna Ivanova;  ;  ;

doi:10.54664/fprc2976

Is the Use of Evidence Necessary for the Justification of Beliefs?

Diogenes ◽

10.54664/fprc2976 ◽

2019 ◽

Vol 27 (2) ◽

Author(s):

Anna Ivanova ◽

◽

Keyword(s):

Mental States ◽

Generality Problem ◽

Linguistic Practices

The article analyses the conflicting views of reliabilism and evidentialism on the following question – What is the leading condition in ascribing justification to beliefs: reliability or evaluation through evidence. The evidentialist view is defended by arguments, derived from the linguistic practices of ascribing justification in complex conditions. The generality problem is interpreted as an exemplification of the complexity of cognitive situations and it is argued that complexity requires reference to the mental states as a means for ascribing justification. Reliability is also recognized as a factor for ascribing justification to some beliefs when it serves as a type of evidence.

Download Full-text

LINGUAGEM E ENATIVISMO

Prometheus - Journal of Philosophy ◽

10.52052/issn.2176-5960.pro.v12i33.13811 ◽

2020 ◽

Author(s):

Marcos Silva ◽

Iana Cavalcanti ◽

Hugo Mota

Keyword(s):

Representational Content ◽

Mental States ◽

Hard Problem ◽

Linguistic Practices ◽

The Hard Problem ◽

Hard Problem Of Content ◽

Internal Mental States

Language does not have to be held as a problem for radical enactivists. The scope objection usually presented to criticize enactivist explanations is a problem only if we have a referentialist and representationalist view of the nature of language. Here we present a normative hypothesis for the great question concerning the hard problem of content, namely, on how linguistic practices develop from minds without content. We carry representational content when we master inferential relations and we master inferential relations when we master normative relations, especially when we are introduced into frameworks of authorizations and prohibitions. Inspired by the anti-intellectualism of the later Wittgenstein and Brandom’s inferentialism, we present the hypothesis that language emerges from inferentially articulated action from normative elements and not from manipulation in internal mental states of contents fixed by reference to external things.

Download Full-text

When Mother Earth Rises Up

Social Psychology ◽

10.1027/1864-9335/a000112 ◽

2013 ◽

Vol 44 (4) ◽

pp. 271-277 ◽

Cited By ~ 4

Author(s):

Simona Sacchi ◽

Paolo Riva ◽

Marco Brambilla

Keyword(s):

Free Will ◽

Natural Disasters ◽

Natural Disaster ◽

Mental States ◽

Disaster Victims ◽

Willingness To Help ◽

Mother Earth

Anthropomorphization is the tendency to ascribe humanlike features and mental states, such as free will and consciousness, to nonhuman beings or inanimate agents. Two studies investigated the consequences of the anthropomorphization of nature on people’s willingness to help victims of natural disasters. Study 1 (N = 96) showed that the humanization of nature correlated negatively with willingness to help natural disaster victims. Study 2 (N = 52) tested for causality, showing that the anthropomorphization of nature reduced participants’ intentions to help the victims. Overall, our findings suggest that humanizing nature undermines the tendency to support victims of natural disasters.

Download Full-text