What (in)coherence is not

Grazer Philosophische Studien 99 (2):125-134 (2022)
  Copy   BIBTEX

Abstract

Two or more attitudinal states are incoherent if and only if, necessarily, under conditions of full transparency, you are disposed to give up one of them. This is roughly the account of incoherence that has recently been put forward by Alex Worsnip (2018). In this paper, I argue that Worsnip’s account of incoherence is incorrect. Not only does it fail to be fully general (i.e., it does not allow us to assess the coherence of all combinations of attitudes), but it also implies that an agent is necessarily incoherent just in virtue of being in one attitudinal state.

Author's Profile

Julian Fink
Universität Bayreuth

Analytics

Added to PP
2022-10-14

Downloads
177 (#86,098)

6 months
64 (#89,460)

Historical graph of downloads since first upload
This graph includes both downloads from PhilArchive and clicks on external links on PhilPapers.
How can I increase my downloads?