RETHINKING THE DEBRIEFING PARADIGM: THE RATIONALITY OF BELIEF PERSEVERANCE (pages 51-74)

Submitted by logos on Wed, 03/28/2012 - 11:32
paper title: 

RETHINKING THE DEBRIEFING PARADIGM: THE RATIONALITY OF BELIEF PERSEVERANCE (pages 51-74)

paper type: 
article
paper author: 

David M. GODDEN

paper author family name: 

M. GODDEN

paper abstract: 

ABSTRACT: By examining particular cases of belief perseverance following the undermining of their original evidentiary grounds, this paper considers two theories of rational belief revision: foundation and coherence. Gilbert Harman has argued for coherence over foundationalism on the grounds that the foundations theory absurdly deems most of our beliefs to be not rationally held. A consequence of the unacceptability of foundationalism is that belief perseverance is rational. This paper defends the intuitive judgement that belief perseverance is irrational by offering a competing explanation of what goes on in cases like the debriefing paradigm which does not rely upon foundationalist principles but instead shows that such cases are properly viewed as instances of positive undermining of the sort described by the coherence theory.

paper issue: 
7

Powered by Drupal 6 | web development: Codrin Dinu Vasiliu

Powered by Drupal, an open source content management system
© 2010 Logos & Episteme | An International Journal of Epistemology. Drupal theme by Kiwi Themes.