Show simple item record

Files in this item

Thumbnail

Item metadata

dc.contributor.authorDickie, Imogen
dc.date.accessioned2019-09-20T09:30:04Z
dc.date.available2019-09-20T09:30:04Z
dc.date.issued2017-10
dc.identifier.citationDickie , I 2017 , ' Everybody needs to know? ' , Philosophical Studies , vol. 174 , no. 10 , pp. 2571–2583 . https://doi.org/10.1007/s11098-016-0731-2en
dc.identifier.issn0031-8116
dc.identifier.otherPURE: 261206344
dc.identifier.otherPURE UUID: 8f47f0e0-81ee-467f-8237-e9708fccf4ea
dc.identifier.otherScopus: 84978744493
dc.identifier.otherORCID: /0000-0001-9346-643X/work/69029586
dc.identifier.urihttps://hdl.handle.net/10023/18529
dc.descriptionContribution to a symposium on Ernie Sosa *Judgment and Agency*en
dc.description.abstractI propose an amendment to Sosa’s virtue reliabilism. Sosa’s framework assigns a central role to sophisticated, conceptual, motivational states: ‘intentions to affirm aptly’. I argue that the suggestion that ordinary knowers in fact are motivated by such intentions in everyday belief-forming situations is at best problematic, and explore the possibility of an alternative virtue reliabilist framework. In this alternative framework, the role Sosa assigns to ‘intentions to affirm aptly’ is played instead by non-conceptual motivational states, which I call ‘needs’. The first part of the paper sketches Sosa’s framework. The second develops the need-based alternative. I close by comparing the two proposals, concluding that the onus is at least on Sosa to say why his intention-based framework should be preferred.
dc.language.isoeng
dc.relation.ispartofPhilosophical Studiesen
dc.rights© Springer Science+Business Media Dordrecht 2016. This work has been made available online in accordance with publisher policies or with permission. Permission for further reuse of this content should be sought from the publisher or the rights holder. This is the author created accepted manuscript following peer review and may differ slightly from the final published version. The final published version of this work is available at https://doi.org/10.1007/s11098-016-0731-2en
dc.subjectVirtue reliabilismen
dc.subjectGettieren
dc.subjectSafetyen
dc.subjectMotivationen
dc.subjectConceptualen
dc.subjectNon-conceptualen
dc.subjectSosaen
dc.subjectB Philosophy (General)en
dc.subjectT-DASen
dc.subject.lccB1en
dc.titleEverybody needs to know?en
dc.typeJournal articleen
dc.description.versionPostprinten
dc.contributor.institutionUniversity of St Andrews. Philosophyen
dc.identifier.doihttps://doi.org/10.1007/s11098-016-0731-2
dc.description.statusPeer revieweden
dc.date.embargoedUntil2017-07-20


This item appears in the following Collection(s)

Show simple item record