PhilArchive
open access
The Relevance of Belief Outsourcing to Whether Arguments Can Change Minds
There is a wealth of evidence which indicates that arguments are not very efficient tools for changing minds. Against this scepticism, Dutilh Novaes (2023) presents evidence that, given the right social context, arguments sometimes play a significant role in belief revision. However, drawing on Levy (2021), I argue that the evidence Dutilh Novaes cites is compatible with the view that it is not arguments that change individual minds but instead belief outsourcing that occurs alongside the consideration of arguments.
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
- How to Argue for Pragmatic Encroachment#763694
- A PWK-style Argumentation Framework and Expansion#76585
- “Do as I Say, Not as I Do” - The role of hypocrisy metaperceptions in conversations about pro-environmental change#196181
- Courts Won’t Settle the Fight Over AI and Creative Work: Politics Will#1075888
- As true as 'you think': Preserving the core of folk psychology#767217
Record · ID 70992
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