Assertion is Weak

Philosophers' Imprint (forthcoming)
Download Edit this record How to cite View on PhilPapers
Recent work has argued that belief is weak: the level of rational credence required for belief is relatively low. That literature has contrasted belief with assertion, arguing that the latter requires an epistemic state much stronger than (weak) belief—perhaps knowledge or even certainty. We argue that this is wrong: assertion is just as weak as belief. We first present a variety of new arguments for this claim, and then show that the standard arguments for stronger norms are not convincing. Finally, we sketch an alternative picture on which the fundamental norm of assertion is to say what you believe, but both belief and assertion are weak. To help make sense of this, we propose that both belief and assertion involve navigating a tradeoff between accuracy and informativity: it can makes sense to believe or say something you only have weak evidence for, so long as it’s sufficiently informative.
PhilPapers/Archive ID
Upload history
Archival date: 2021-10-02
View other versions
Added to PP index

Total views
253 ( #26,007 of 64,195 )

Recent downloads (6 months)
253 ( #1,746 of 64,195 )

How can I increase my downloads?

Downloads since first upload
This graph includes both downloads from PhilArchive and clicks on external links on PhilPapers.