-
The Counterpossibles of Science versus the Science of Counterpossibles Br. J. Philos. Sci. (IF 3.2) Pub Date : 2024-11-19 Daniel Dohrn
The British Journal for the Philosophy of Science, Ahead of Print.
-
In defense of virtual veridicalism Philosophical Studies (IF 1.1) Pub Date : 2024-11-20 Yen-Tung Lee
This paper defends virtual veridicalism, according to which many perceptual experiences in virtual reality are veridical. My argument centers on perceptual variation, the phenomenon in which perceptual experience appears all the same while being reliably generated by different properties under different circumstances. It consists of three stages. The first stage argues that perceptual variation can
-
The Idea of Mismatch in Evolutionary Medicine Br. J. Philos. Sci. (IF 3.2) Pub Date : 2024-11-18 Pierrick Bourrat, Paul Griffiths
The British Journal for the Philosophy of Science, Ahead of Print.
-
What are we to do? Making sense of ‘joint ought’ talk Philosophical Studies (IF 1.1) Pub Date : 2024-11-18 Rowan Mellor, Margaret Shea
We argue for three main claims. First, the sentence ‘A and B ought to φ and ψ’ can express what we a call a joint-ought claim: the claim that the plurality A and B ought to φ and ψ respectively. Second, the truth-value of this joint-ought claim can differ from the truth-value of the pair of claims ‘A ought to φ’ and ‘B ought to ψ.’ This is because what A and B jointly ought to do can diverge from what
-
Disagreement, AI alignment, and bargaining Philosophical Studies (IF 1.1) Pub Date : 2024-11-18 Harry R. Lloyd
New AI technologies have the potential to cause unintended harms in diverse domains including warfare, judicial sentencing, medicine and governance. One strategy for realising the benefits of AI whilst avoiding its potential dangers is to ensure that new AIs are properly ‘aligned’ with some form of ‘alignment target.’ One danger of this strategy is that–dependent on the alignment target chosen–our
-
Withhold by default: a difference between epistemic and practical rationality Philosophical Studies (IF 1.1) Pub Date : 2024-11-18 Chris Tucker
In practical rationality, if two reasons for alternative actions are tied, then either action is *permissible*. In epistemic rationality, we get the Epistemic Ties Datum: if the reasons for belief and disbelief are tied, then withholding judgment is *required*. I argue that this difference is explained by a difference in default biases. Practical rationality is biased toward permissibility. An action
-
The Contents and Causes of Curiosity Br. J. Philos. Sci. (IF 3.2) Pub Date : 2024-11-18 Peter Carruthers
The British Journal for the Philosophy of Science, Ahead of Print.
-
Heavy‐duty conceptual engineering Noûs (IF 1.8) Pub Date : 2024-11-18 Steffen Koch, Jakob Ohlhorst
Conceptual engineering is the process of assessing and improving our conceptual repertoire. Some authors have claimed that introducing or revising concepts through conceptual engineering can go as far as expanding the realm of thinkable thoughts and thus enable us to form beliefs, hypotheses, wishes, or desires that we are currently unable to form. If true, this would allow conceptual engineers to
-
A style guide for the structuralist Noûs (IF 1.8) Pub Date : 2024-11-18 Lucy Carr
Ontic structuralists claim that there are no individual objects, and that reality should instead be thought of as a “web of relations”. It is difficult to make this metaphysical picture precise, however, since languages usually characterize the world by describing the objects that exist in it. This paper proposes a solution to the problem; I argue that when discourse is reformulated in the language
-
Against anti‐fanaticism Philos. Phenomenol. Res. (IF 1.3) Pub Date : 2024-11-18 Christian Tarsney
Should you be willing to forego any sure good for a tiny probability of a vastly greater good? Fanatics say you should, anti‐fanatics say you should not. Anti‐fanaticism has great intuitive appeal. But, I argue, these intuitions are untenable, because satisfying them in their full generality is incompatible with three very plausible principles: acyclicity, a minimal dominance principle, and the principle
-
Does domination require unequal power? Philos. Q. (IF 1.1) Pub Date : 2024-11-18 Callum Zavos MacRae
Until recently, many theorists defined domination such that it requires unequal power, and most others held that even if domination were not defined as requiring unequal power, a requirement of unequal power would nevertheless follow from the definition of what domination is. On these views, unless there is an imbalance of power between the two parties, there can be no relation of domination. However
-
The prescriptive and the hypological: A radical detachment Philosophical Studies (IF 1.1) Pub Date : 2024-11-16 Maria Lasonen-Aarnio
My aim in this paper is to introduce and motivate a general normative framework, which I call feasibilism, and to sketch a view of the relationship between the prescriptive and the hypological in the epistemic domain by drawing on the theoretical resources provided by this framework. I then generalise the lesson to the moral domain. I begin by motivating feasibilism. A wide range of norms appear to
-
What Is Rational Sentimentalism? Philosophical Studies (IF 1.1) Pub Date : 2024-11-13 Selim Berker
This commentary on Justin D’Arms and Daniel Jacobson’s Rational Sentimentalism explores two key issues: what exactly is the position D’Arms and Jacobson call ‘rational sentimentalism’, and why exactly do they restrict their theorizing to the normative categories they dub ‘the sentimentalist values’? Along the way, a challenge is developed for D’Arms and Jacobson’s claim that there is no “response-independent”
-
Incommensurability and democratic deliberation in bioethics Philosophical Studies (IF 1.1) Pub Date : 2024-11-13 Nir Eyal
Often, a health resource distribution (or, more generally, a health policy) ranks higher than another on one value, say, on promoting total population health; and lower on another, say, on promoting that of the worst off. Then, some opine, there need not be a rational determination as to which of the multiple distributions that partially fulfill both one ought to choose. Sometimes, reason determines
-
Metaphor and ambiguity Philosophical Studies (IF 1.1) Pub Date : 2024-11-13 Elek Lane
What is the status of metaphorical meaning? Is it an input to semantic composition or is it derived post-semantically? This question has divided theorists for decades. Griceans argue that metaphorical meaning/content is a kind of implicature that is generated through post-semantic processing. Others, such as the contextualists, argue that metaphorical meaning is an input to semantic composition and
-
From modality to millianism Noûs (IF 1.8) Pub Date : 2024-11-12 Nathan Salmón
A new argument is offered which proceeds through epistemic possibility (for all S knows, p), cutting a trail from modality to Millianism, the controversial thesis that the semantic content of a proper name is simply its bearer. New definitions are provided for various epistemic modal notions. A surprising theorem about epistemic necessity is proved. A proposition p can be epistemically necessary for
-
Getting lucid about lucid dreaming Philos. Q. (IF 1.1) Pub Date : 2024-11-11 Robert Cowan
Lucid dreams are a distinctive and intriguing phenomenon where subjects apparently possess, inter alia, conscious knowledge that they are dreaming while they are dreaming. I here develop and defend a new model of lucid dreaming, what I call the ‘Dyadic Model’, according to which lucid dreams involve the tokening of both dreaming and non-dreaming states. The model is developed to successfully defend
-
Proof-Theoretic Validity isn’t Intuitionistic; So What? Australasian Journal of Philosophy (IF 1.0) Pub Date : 2024-11-07 Will Stafford
Several recent results bring into focus the superintuitionistic nature of most notions of proof-theoretic validity, but little work has been done evaluating the consequences of these results. Proof...
-
Beyond Preferences in AI Alignment Philosophical Studies (IF 1.1) Pub Date : 2024-11-09 Tan Zhi-Xuan, Micah Carroll, Matija Franklin, Hal Ashton
The dominant practice of AI alignment assumes (1) that preferences are an adequate representation of human values, (2) that human rationality can be understood in terms of maximizing the satisfaction of preferences, and (3) that AI systems should be aligned with the preferences of one or more humans to ensure that they behave safely and in accordance with our values. Whether implicitly followed or
-
The censor's burden Noûs (IF 1.8) Pub Date : 2024-11-09 Hrishikesh Joshi
Censorship involves, inter alia, adopting a certain type of epistemic policy. While much has been written on the harms and benefits of free expression and the associated rights thereof, the epistemic preconditions of justified censorship are relatively underexplored. In this paper, I argue that examining intrapersonal norms of how we ought to treat evidence that might come to us over time can shed
-
What is reasonable doubt? For philosophical studies special issue on Sosa’s ‘epistemic explanations’ Philosophical Studies (IF 1.1) Pub Date : 2024-11-08 Lilith Mace, Mona Simion
This paper develops and defends novel accounts of accurate and reasonable doubt. We take a cue from Sosa's telic epistemic normative picture to argue that one’s degree of doubt that p is accurate just in case it matches the level of veritic risk involved in believing that p. In turn, on this account, reasonable doubt is doubt that is generated by a properly functioning cognitive capacity with the function
-
Content determination in dreams supports the imagination theory Philosophical Studies (IF 1.1) Pub Date : 2024-11-08 Daniel Gregory
There are two leading theories about the ontology of dreams. One holds that dreams involve hallucinations and beliefs. The other holds that dreaming involves sensory and propositional imagining. I highlight two features of dreams which are more easily explained by the imagination theory. One is that certain things seem to be true in our dreams, even though they are not represented sensorily; this is
-
Paradoxes of infinite aggregation Noûs (IF 1.8) Pub Date : 2024-11-08 Frank Hong, Jeffrey Sanford Russell
There are infinitely many ways the world might be, and there may well be infinitely many people in it. These facts raise moral paradoxes. We explore a conflict between two highly attractive principles: a Pareto principle that says that what is better for everyone is better overall, and a statewise dominance principle that says that what is sure to turn out better is better on balance. We refine and
-
Reflecting on believability: on the epistemic approach to justifying implicit commitments Philosophical Studies (IF 1.1) Pub Date : 2024-11-07 Maciej Głowacki, Mateusz Łełyk
-
-
Consequentialism and deontological prohibitions Philos. Q. (IF 1.1) Pub Date : 2024-11-06 Pablo Zendejas Medina
It is widely held that deontological moral theories are agent-relative because they include prohibitions on actions such as killing, or breaking promises, which cannot be understood as giving the same goal to different agents. They are thus thought to be inconsistent with consequentialism, in its traditional, agent-neutral form. However, the standard argument for this claim is incomplete, a problem
-
The new internalism about prudential value Philosophical Studies (IF 1.1) Pub Date : 2024-11-04 Anthony Kelley
According to internalism about prudential value, the token states of affairs that are basically good for you must be suitably connected, under the proper conditions, to your positive attitudes. It is commonly thought that any theory of welfare that implies internalism is guaranteed to respect the alienation constraint, the doctrine that you cannot be alienated from that which is basically good for
-
Ending a special relationship: Toward an ethics of divorce Philos. Q. (IF 1.1) Pub Date : 2024-11-04 Monika Betzler
Romantic partnerships are typically among the most important goods in our lives. But love sometime ends, and so too do relationships. Divorcing partners are particularly vulnerable to being wronged and harmed. The aim of this paper is to develop an ethics of divorce, by establishing that divorce is a condition for the possibility of the distinct value of romantic partnerships. Different sets of rights
-
The Real Guarantee in De Se thought: How to characterize it? Philos. Q. (IF 1.1) Pub Date : 2024-11-04 Manuel García-Carpintero
Castañeda, Perry and Lewis argued that, among singular thoughts in general, thoughts about oneself ‘as oneself’—first-personal thoughts, which Lewis aptly called de se—have a distinctive character that traditional views of contents cannot characterize. Drawing on Anscombe, Annalisa Coliva has argued that a feature she calls Real Guarantee marks apart de se thoughts—as opposed to others including Immunity
-
Awareness Revision and Belief Extension Australasian Journal of Philosophy (IF 1.0) Pub Date : 2024-10-28 Joe Roussos
What norm governs how an agent should change their beliefs when they encounter a completely new possibility? Orthodox Bayesianism has no answer, as it takes all learning to involve updating prior b...
-
Timeslice Prioritarianism, Prudence, and Weak Pareto Australasian Journal of Philosophy (IF 1.0) Pub Date : 2024-10-27 Susumu Cato, Iwao Hirose
Andrić and Herlitz (2022) object to Timeslice Prioritarianism on the basis that it violates two purportedly uncontroversial properties: prudence and Weak Pareto. We will claim that their objection ...
-
Doing Otherwise in a Deterministic World J. Philos. (IF 1.6) Pub Date : 2024-10-30 Christian Loew
An influential version of the Consequence argument, the most famous argument for the incompatibility of free will and determinism, goes as follows: For an agent to be able to do otherwise, there has to be a possible world with the same laws and the same past as her actual world in which she does otherwise. However, if the actual world is deterministic, there is no such world. Hence, no agent in a deterministic
-
What Is Intimacy? J. Philos. (IF 1.6) Pub Date : 2024-10-30 Jasmine Gunkel
Why is it more violating to grab a stranger’s thigh or stroke their face than it is to grab their forearm? Why is it worse to read someone’s dream journal without permission than it is to read their bird watching field notes? Why are gestation mandates so incredibly intrusive? Intimacy is key to understanding these cases, and to explaining many of our most stringent rights. I present two ways of thinking
-
-
What is a Right? Australasian Journal of Philosophy (IF 1.0) Pub Date : 2024-10-28 Kieran Setiya
This paper argues for a theory of natural rights on which they are explained in terms of reasons supplied by rational consent. When B has a claim-right against A that A φ, A’s non-consent is not a ...
-
Working as Equals: Relational Egalitarianism and the Workplace Australasian Journal of Philosophy (IF 1.0) Pub Date : 2024-10-28 Daniel Halliday
Published in Australasian Journal of Philosophy (Ahead of Print, 2024)
-
In defense of value incomparability: A reply to Dorr, Nebel, and Zuehl Noûs (IF 1.8) Pub Date : 2024-10-30 Erik Carlson, Olle Risberg
Cian Dorr, Jacob Nebel, and Jake Zuehl have argued that no objects are incomparable in value. One set of arguments they offer depart from a principle they call ‘Strong Monotonicity’, which states that if x is good and y is not good, then x is better than y. In this article, we respond to those arguments, thereby defending the possibility of value incomparability.
-
A unified theory of risk Philos. Q. (IF 1.1) Pub Date : 2024-10-30 Jaakko Hirvelä, Niall J Paterson
A novel theory of comparative risk is developed and defended. Extant theories are criticized for failing the tests of extensional and formal adequacy. A unified diagnosis is proposed: extant theories consider risk to be a univariable function, but risk is a multivariate function. According to the theory proposed, which we call the unified theory of risk, the riskiness of a proposition is a function
-
The epistemic and the deontic preface paradox Philos. Q. (IF 1.1) Pub Date : 2024-10-30 Lina Maria Lissia, Jan Sprenger
This paper generalizes the preface paradox beyond the conjunctive aggregation of beliefs and constructs an analogous paradox for deontic reasoning. The analysis of the deontic case suggests a systematic restriction of intuitive rules for reasoning with obligations. This proposal can be transferred to the epistemic case: It avoids the preface and the lottery paradox and saves one of the two directions
-
E Pur Si Move! Motion-Based Illusions, Perception and Depiction Australasian Journal of Philosophy (IF 1.0) Pub Date : 2024-10-30 Luca Marchetti
Can static pictures depict motion and temporal properties? This is an open question that is becoming increasingly discussed in both aesthetics and the philosophy of mind. Theorists working on this ...
-
Unpossessed evidence revisited: our options are limited Philosophical Studies (IF 1.1) Pub Date : 2024-10-29 Sanford C. Goldberg
Several influential thought experiments from Harman 1973 purport to show that unpossessed evidence can undermine knowledge. Recently, some epistemologists have appealed to these thought experiments in defense of a logically stronger thesis: unpossessed evidence can defeat justification. But these appeals fail to appreciate that Harman himself thought of his examples as Gettier cases, and so would have
-
Beautiful, troubling art: in defense of non-summative judgment Philosophical Studies (IF 1.1) Pub Date : 2024-10-29 P. Quinn White
Do the ethical features of an artwork bear on its aesthetic value? This movie endorses misogyny, that song is a civil rights anthem, the clay constituting this statue was extracted with underpaid labor—are facts like these the proper bases for aesthetic evaluation? I argue that this debate has suffered from a false presupposition: that if the answer is “yes” (for at least some such ethical features)
-
Dialetheism and the countermodel problem Philos. Phenomenol. Res. (IF 1.3) Pub Date : 2024-10-28 Andreas Fjellstad, Ben Martin
According to some dialetheists, we ought to reject the distinction between object and meta‐languages. Given that dialetheists advocate truth‐value gluts within their object‐language, whether in order to solve the liar paradox or for some other reason, this rejection of the object‐/meta‐language distinction comes with the commitment to use a glutty metatheory. While it has been pointed out that a glutty
-
Fear of Death and the Will to Live Australasian Journal of Philosophy (IF 1.0) Pub Date : 2024-10-28 Tom Cochrane
The fear of death resists philosophical attempts at reconciliation. Building on theories of emotion, I argue that we can understand our fear as triggered by a de se mode of thinking about death whi...
-
In Defence of Macroidealism Australasian Journal of Philosophy (IF 1.0) Pub Date : 2024-10-28 Robert Smithson
This paper defends macroidealism: the thesis that physical truths metaphysically depend on truths about the phenomenal experiences of macroscopic subjects. I argue that macroidealism has explanator...
-
Romantic Empiricism: Nature Art and Ecology from Herder to Humboldt Australasian Journal of Philosophy (IF 1.0) Pub Date : 2024-10-22 Anton Kabeshkin
Published in Australasian Journal of Philosophy (Ahead of Print, 2024)
-
Non-Monotonic Theories of Aesthetic Value Australasian Journal of Philosophy (IF 1.0) Pub Date : 2024-10-21 Robbie Kubala
Theorists of aesthetic value since Hume have traditionally aimed to justify at least some comparative judgments of aesthetic value and to explain why we thereby have more reason to appreciate some ...
-
The duty to listen Philos. Phenomenol. Res. (IF 1.3) Pub Date : 2024-10-25 Hrishikesh Joshi, Robin McKenna
In philosophical work on the ethics of conversational exchange, much has been written regarding the speaker side—i.e., on the rights and duties we have as speakers. This paper explores the relatively neglected topic of the duties pertaining to the listeners’ side of the exchange. Following W.K. Clifford, we argue that it's fruitful to think of our epistemic resources as common property. Furthermore
-
The Tangle of Science: Reliability Beyond Method, Rigour, and Objectivity Australasian Journal of Philosophy (IF 1.0) Pub Date : 2024-10-24 Steve Clarke
Published in Australasian Journal of Philosophy (Ahead of Print, 2024)
-
Promotionalism, orthogonality, and instrumental convergence Philosophical Studies (IF 1.1) Pub Date : 2024-10-21 Nathaniel Sharadin
Suppose there are no in-principle restrictions on the contents of arbitrarily intelligent agents’ goals. According to “instrumental convergence” arguments, potentially scary things follow. I do two things in this paper. First, focusing on the influential version of the instrumental convergence argument due to Nick Bostrom, I explain why such arguments require an account of “promotion”, i.e., an account
-
-
Better guesses Philos. Phenomenol. Res. (IF 1.3) Pub Date : 2024-10-22 Niels Linnemann, Feraz Azhar
It has recently become popular to analyze scenarios in which we guess, in terms of a trade‐off between the accuracy of our guess (namely, its credence) and its specificity (namely, how many answers it rules out). Dorst and Mandelkern describe an account of guessing, based on epistemic utility theory (EUT), in which permissible guesses vary depending on how one weighs accuracy against specificity. We
-
Could've known better Philos. Q. (IF 1.1) Pub Date : 2024-10-22 Alexander Greenberg
Could you have taken precautions against a risk you were unaware of? This question lies at the heart of debates in ethics and legal philosophy concerning whether it's justifiable to blame or punish those who cause harm inadvertently or out of ignorance. But the question is crucially ambiguous, depending on what is understood to be inside or outside the scope of the ‘could’. And this ambiguity undermines
-
Philosophical Methodology: From Data to Theory Australasian Journal of Philosophy (IF 1.0) Pub Date : 2024-10-22 Elijah Chudnoff
Published in Australasian Journal of Philosophy (Ahead of Print, 2024)
-
Understanding friendship Philosophical Issues (IF 0.6) Pub Date : 2024-10-22 Michel Croce, Matthew Jope
This article takes issue with two prominent views in the current debate around epistemic partiality in friendship. Strong views of epistemic partiality hold that friendship may require biased beliefs in direct conflict with epistemic norms. Weak views hold that friendship may place normative expectations on belief formation but in a manner that does not violate these norms. It is argued that neither
-
Freedom, Omniscience and the Contingent A Priori Mind (IF 1.8) Pub Date : 2024-10-21 Fabio Lampert
One of the major challenges in the philosophy of religion is theological fatalism — roughly, the claim that divine omniscience is incompatible with free will. In this article, I present new reasons to be sceptical of what I consider to be the strongest argument for theological fatalism. First, I argue that divine foreknowledge is not necessary for an argument against free will if we take into account
-
Meaning, purpose, and narrative Noûs (IF 1.8) Pub Date : 2024-10-21 Michael Zhao
According to many philosophers, “the meaning of life” refers to our cosmic purpose, the activity that we were created by God or a purposive universe to perform. If there is no God or teleology, there is no such thing as the meaning of life. But this need not be the last word on the matter. In this paper, I ask what the benefits provided by a cosmic purpose are, and go on to argue that thinking of our
-
What is the Feeling of Effort About? Australasian Journal of Philosophy (IF 1.0) Pub Date : 2024-10-21 Juan Pablo Bermúdez
For agents like us, the feeling of effort is a very useful thing. It helps us sense how hard an action is, control its level of intensity, and decide whether to continue or stop performing it. Whil...
-
Reconceptualising the Psychological Theory of Generics Philosophical Studies (IF 1.1) Pub Date : 2024-10-18 Tom Ralston
Generics have historically proven difficult to analyse using the tools of formal semantics. In this paper, I argue that an influential theory of the meaning of generics due to Sarah-Jane Leslie, the Psychological Theory of Generics, is best interpreted not as a theory of their meaning, but as a theory of the psychological heuristics that we use to judge whether or not generics are true. I argue that
-
Testimonial liberalism and the balance of epistemic goals Philosophical Studies (IF 1.1) Pub Date : 2024-10-18 Ross F. Patrizio
There are two broad views in the epistemology of testimony, conservatism and liberalism. The two views disagree over a particular necessary condition on testimonial justification: the positive reasons requirement (PRR). Perhaps the most prominent objection levelled at liberalism from the conservative camp stems from gullibility; without PRR, the thought goes, an objectionable form of gullibility looms