Switch to: References

Add citations

You must login to add citations.
  1. Open Faith and Jealous God: Some Remarks on Faith and Evidentialism.Sylwia Wilczewska - 2021 - Australasian Philosophical Review 5 (1):98-103.
    ABSTRACT In response to Katherine Dormandy’s argument for the superiority of the kind of faith which respects the evidence against retaining faith, I argue that the necessity of deciding which way of weighting evidence for and against retaining faith is preferable leads to Pascal’s wager for evidentialists: the choice between closed and open faith based on the calculation of epistemic and non-epistemic losses and gains, disclosing the tension between the kind of faith grounded in God’s reality and the kind which (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  • Agnosticism I: Language, perspectives and evidence.Sylwia Wilczewska - 2020 - Philosophy Compass 15 (6).
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   1 citation  
  • The Partiality of Faith.Blake McAllister - 2021 - Australasian Philosophical Review 5 (1):36-45.
    ABSTRACT Katherine Dormandy argues that there is no partiality in virtuous faith. Partiality biases and leads to noetic entrenchment. In response, I contend there is an important sense in which virtuous faith is partial towards its object. Namely, it disposes one to perceive the object as more trustworthy and to rely on this partialist evidence in forming beliefs, even when the impartialist evidence points in the other direction. There are, after all, situations in which impartialist evidence is apt to mislead (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   1 citation  
  • The epistemic benefits of religious disagreement.Katherine Dormandy - 2020 - Religious Studies 56 (3):390-408.
    Scientific researchers welcome disagreement as a way of furthering epistemic aims. Religious communities, by contrast, tend to regard it as a potential threat to their beliefs. But I argue that religious disagreement can help achieve religious epistemic aims. I do not argue this by comparing science and religion, however. For scientific hypotheses are ideally held with a scholarly neutrality, and my aim is to persuade those who arecommittedto religious beliefs that religious disagreement can be epistemically beneficial for them too.
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   10 citations  
  • A Faithful Response to Disagreement.Lara Buchak - 2021 - The Philosophical Review 130 (2):191-226.
    In the peer disagreement debate, three intuitively attractive claims seem to conflict: there is disagreement among peers on many important matters; peer disagreement is a serious challenge to one’s own opinion; and yet one should be able to maintain one’s opinion on important matters. I show that contrary to initial appearances, we can accept all three of these claims. Disagreement significantly shifts the balance of the evidence; but with respect to certain kinds of claims, one should nonetheless retain one’s beliefs. (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   7 citations  
  • Doxasticism: Belief and the information-responsiveness of mind.Robert Audi - 2020 - Episteme 17 (4):542-562.
    ABSTRACTThis paper concerns a problem that has received insufficient analysis in the philosophical literature so far: the conditions under which an information-bearing state – say a perception or recollection – yields belief. The paper distinguishes between belief and a psychological property easily conflated with belief, illustrates the tendency of philosophers to overlook this distinction, and offers a positive conception of the mind's information-responsiveness that requires far less belief-formation – and far less formation of other propositional attitudes – than has been (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   1 citation  
  • Disagreement and Religion.Matthew A. Benton - 2021 - In Matthew A. Benton & Jonathan L. Kvanvig (eds.), Religious Disagreement and Pluralism. Oxford: Oxford University Press. pp. 1-40.
    This chapter covers contemporary work on disagreement, detailing both the conceptual and normative issues in play in the debates in mainstream analytic epistemology, and how these relate to religious diversity and disagreement. §1 examines several sorts of disagreement, and considers several epistemological issues: in particular, what range of attitudes a body of evidence can support, how to understand higher-order evidence, and who counts as an epistemic “peer”. §2 considers how these questions surface when considering disagreements over religion, including debates over (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   1 citation  
  • Does Epistemic Humility Threaten Religious Beliefs?Katherine Dormandy - 2018 - Journal of Psychology and Theology 46 (4):292– 304.
    In a fallen world fraught with evidence against religious beliefs, it is tempting to think that, on the assumption that those beliefs are true, the best way to protect them is to hold them dogmatically. Dogmatic belief, which is highly confident and resistant to counterevidence, may fail to exhibit epistemic virtues such as humility and may instead manifest epistemic vices such as arrogance or servility, but if this is the price of secure belief in religious truths, so be it. I (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   4 citations