PhilArchive
open access
Acceptance and Deference: The Case for Epistemic Discipline
Pessimists about moral deference argue there is something problematic about deferential moral beliefs, while optimists contend deference can be justified or even uniquely valuable. We are confronted with the problem of deference in opaque conditions: those in which understanding is costly or impossible. The best strategy in such conditions is to accept some relevant proposition(s) as premises in practical reasoning without believing them in the normal sense. Deferential beliefs run risks in our subsequent reasoning on related topics; acceptance is a form of dependence on testimony that mitigates these problems.
Conceptio Open Archive
Analyze & explore related research in Conceptio
Connect this record directly into your research workflow or AI agent. Explore citations across open repositories, query full text, and export structured proof bundles.
This document is indexed with metadata only: full text is not available in the archive for this record. Open the official source ↗
Related documents
- The Social Value of Reasoning in Epistemic Justification#755996
- Living on the Edge: Against Epistemic Permissivism#766125
- Justified Believing:Avoiding the Paradox#717540
- Racionalidad y Lenguaje. A propósito de la obra de Paul Grice#698310
- Epistemic Internalism, Content Externalism and the Subjective/Objective Justification Distinction#708036
Record · ID 118734
Retrieved via Conceptio: every document is proof-bundled with source, license, and retrieval metadata.
Retrieved via Conceptio: every document is proof-bundled with source, license, and retrieval metadata.
Bring this data into your agent: Connect via MCP or API · 20 free credits to start · no card required
Read the Docs → · View CLI source on GitHub · Conceptio Open Knowledge Archive
Read the Docs → · View CLI source on GitHub · Conceptio Open Knowledge Archive