PhilArchive
open access
Rescuing Companions in Guilt Arguments
Christopher Cowie has recently argued that companions in guilt arguments against the moral error theory that appeal to epistemic reasons cannot work. I show that such companions in guilt arguments can work if, as we have good reason to believe, moral reasons and epistemic reasons are instances of fundamentally the same relation.
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 Epistemic Role of Outlaw Emotions#768032
- Circular and question-begging responses to religious disagreement and debunking arguments#754748
- Is the Principle of Testimony Simply Epistemically Fundamental or Simply not? Swinburne on Knowledge by Testimony#754394
- Enticing Emotions#95817
- Knowledge from falsehoods reconsidered#730323
Record · ID 721779
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