Actions, Beliefs, and Consequences

McCarthy, David
April 1998
Philosophical Studies;Apr1998, Vol. 90 Issue 1, p57
Academic Journal
The article probes whether an agent's act is permissible depends, in part, on what the consequences of the act will be, and not on what she believes they will be. There are many variations on this. For example, justification may have more to do with what it is reasonable for the agent to believe rather than what she actually believes. And there are many different kinds of moral theory in which these kinds of distinctions can be made. On some theories, only the consequences of acts are relevant to their permissibility; on others, things beside consequences are relevant.


Related Articles

  • ‘PARTIAL DEFEATERS’ AND THE EPISTEMOLOGY OF DISAGREEMENT. Thune, Michael // Philosophical Quarterly;Apr2010, Vol. 60 Issue 239, p355 

    Can known disagreement with our epistemic peers undermine or defeat the justification our beliefs enjoy? Much of the current literature argues for one of two extreme positions on this topic, either that the justification of each person's belief is (fully) defeated by the awareness of...

  • A Reliabilist Foundationalist Coherentism. Goldberg, Sanford // Erkenntnis;Sep2012, Vol. 77 Issue 2, p187 

    While Process Reliabilism has long been regarded by many as a version of Foundationalism, this paper argues that there is a version of Process Reliabilism that can also been seen as at least a partial vindication of Coherentism as well. The significance of this result lies in what it tells us...

  • SCEPTICISM AND RATIONAL BELIEF. Wedgwood, Ralph // Philosophical Quarterly;Jan1990, Vol. 40 Issue 158, p45 

    Examines the relation between a particular form of skeptical argument and a certain type of theory concerning the nature of knowledge and justified belief. Concepts of knowledge and justified belief; Locus classicus of skeptical argument; Advantages of skepticism and justified belief over their...

  • Counter-evidence and the duty to critically reflect. Katzoff, Charlotte // Analysis;Jan2000, Vol. 60 Issue 1, p89 

    Focuses on the role of counter-evidence in epistemic justification. Types of duties serving as basis for epistemic justification; Reflection of epistemic duty in an individual's belief; Evidentialist notion of justification; Dependence of the epistemic right to remain in doubt on the distinction...

  • Reliabilism in philosophy. Goldberg, Sanford // Philosophical Studies;Jan2009, Vol. 142 Issue 1, p105 

    The following three propositions appear to be individually defensible but jointly inconsistent: (1) reliability is a necessary condition on epistemic justification; (2) on contested matters in philosophy, my beliefs are not reliably formed; (3) some of these beliefs are epistemically justified....

  • Epistemological asymmetries between belief and experience. Huemer, Michael // Philosophical Studies;Feb2013, Vol. 162 Issue 3, p741 

    The article discusses the differentiation of belief and experience based on epistemological method, in contrast to S. Siegel's central thesis on the etiology of experience. It mentions that one's justification for believing is affected by two factors such as sources of justification and...

  • JUSTIFIED TRUE BELIEF IS KNOWLEDGE. Dawson, Graham // Philosophical Quarterly;Oct81, Vol. 31 Issue 125, p315 

    Defends the familiar thesis that justified true belief is knowledge. Doubts on the value of continuing hostilities; Alternative formulation of knowledge as a justified true belief; Objective and subjective knowledge; Use of the notion of subjective knowledge to identify the body of true...

  • Knowledge and conviction. Anderson, David // Synthese;Jul2012, Vol. 187 Issue 2, p377 

    Much philosophical effort has been exerted over problems having to do with the correct analysis and application of the concept of epistemic justification. While I do not wish to dispute the central place of this problem in contemporary epistemology, it seems to me that there is a general neglect...

  • On Degrees of Justification. Betz, Gregor // Erkenntnis;Sep2012, Vol. 77 Issue 2, p237 

    This paper gives an explication of our intuitive notion of strength of justification in a controversial debate. It defines a thesis' degree of justification within the theory of dialectical structures as the ratio of coherently adoptable positions according to which that thesis is true over all...


Read the Article


Sorry, but this item is not currently available from your library.

Try another library?
Sign out of this library

Other Topics