tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-31835720.post7019193762513283603..comments2023-05-20T07:46:10.187-07:00Comments on ex-apologist: Notes on Peter van Inwagen's Critique of Clifford's The Ethics of Beliefexapologisthttp://www.blogger.com/profile/09915579495149582531noreply@blogger.comBlogger9125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-31835720.post-49477399456339338362008-05-31T12:14:00.000-07:002008-05-31T12:14:00.000-07:00Are my posts getting better or worse? ;-)Are my posts getting better or worse? ;-)exapologisthttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09915579495149582531noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-31835720.post-77594854907925958012008-05-30T21:16:00.000-07:002008-05-30T21:16:00.000-07:00Sometimes when I read previous posts back, they lo...Sometimes when I read previous posts back, they look like someone else wrote them. I could have said that better, but.. ah well.stimulus packagehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01779696149671472649noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-31835720.post-76099010680864535232008-05-30T12:06:00.000-07:002008-05-30T12:06:00.000-07:00So at least they're justified -- perhaps both in t...<I>So at least they're justified -- perhaps both in the epistemic sense and in the deontological sense -- in believing they know they're right.</I><BR/><BR/>I agree. If I have done all I am capable of to get at the truth of a matter, what more can be asked? Let me add that I should be very careful to be <I>sure</I> that I have done my best, and after I have decided on an issue, I should remain receptive to new evidence or arguments (which seems difficult to do).<BR/><BR/>I also should have respect for those who disagree and not presume to accuse them of being epistemically lazy (chestnuts) or anything like that because after all, they may have some "special insight" which I lack.<BR/><BR/>By the way, keep reading books and papers and summarizing them for us. That works out well.stimulus packagehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01779696149671472649noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-31835720.post-7274368218318922142008-05-30T00:45:00.001-07:002008-05-30T00:45:00.001-07:00John Locke argued that even if it's not in my powe...John Locke argued that even if it's not in my power to become certain of the truth, at least it's in my power perform my duty of proportioning my beliefs to the evidence I have.exapologisthttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09915579495149582531noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-31835720.post-34501260205576755402008-05-29T19:58:00.000-07:002008-05-29T19:58:00.000-07:00My question is: when people disagree on a topic wh...<I>My question is: when people disagree on a topic which must have only one true answer (e.g. god or no god?), how de we know who has the special insight?</I><BR/><BR/>Who says we do? :-)<BR/><BR/>It's tough to say. I imagine that a "seeming evidentialist" (to use an expression from Connee and Feldman) would probably say that, well, they can't be sure. However, it seems to the people that have the insight that they're right, and the way things <I>seem</I> is defeasible, <I>prima facie</I> justification for how things <I>are</I>. So at least they're justified -- perhaps both in the epistemic sense and in the deontological sense -- in believing they know they're right.<BR/><BR/>What do you think?exapologisthttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09915579495149582531noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-31835720.post-42370172858535580372008-05-28T12:32:00.000-07:002008-05-28T12:32:00.000-07:00I should say, I don't know much about Clifford, on...I should say, I don't know <B>much</B> about Clifford, only what I've read from your post.stimulus packagehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01779696149671472649noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-31835720.post-25402245167966433252008-05-28T07:51:00.000-07:002008-05-28T07:51:00.000-07:00I don't know anything about Clifford, but Inwagen ...I don't know anything about Clifford, but Inwagen seems right, as I understand him, in saying that C's standards would leave us unable to believe much of anything.<BR/><BR/>My question is: when people disagree on a topic which must have only one true answer (e.g. god or no god?), how de we know who has the special insight?<BR/><BR/>Of course I've read only your outline of Inwagen's critique, so I may be getting it wrong.stimulus packagehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01779696149671472649noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-31835720.post-66637781930442197632008-05-27T23:21:00.000-07:002008-05-27T23:21:00.000-07:00Hey Dewey,I imagine there are many factors (e.g., ...Hey Dewey,<BR/><BR/>I imagine there are many factors (e.g., people come to a given topic with differing sets of evidence, and this affects one's assessment of that topic; perhaps G.E. Moore was onto something with his distinction between having and being able to give one's reasons; etc.). One of these days, I'm going to wade into the literature on the epistemology of disagreement.<BR/><BR/>What do you think of van Inwagen's take on this?exapologisthttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09915579495149582531noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-31835720.post-67484761871692842392008-05-27T22:24:00.000-07:002008-05-27T22:24:00.000-07:00What's up EA.This topic has been on my mind. Why ...What's up EA.<BR/><BR/>This topic has been on my mind. Why <I>do</I> reasonably informed and rational people look at the same evidence and say it points in different directions?<BR/><BR/>Anyway, just wanted to see if I could post successfully on your blog.stimulus packagehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01779696149671472649noreply@blogger.com