Deference and Uniqueness

Philosophical Studies 176 (3):709-732 (2019)
Download Edit this record How to cite View on PhilPapers
Deference principles are principles that describe when, and to what extent, it’s rational to defer to others. Recently, some authors have used such principles to argue for Evidential Uniqueness, the claim that for every batch of evidence, there’s a unique doxastic state that it’s permissible for subjects with that total evidence to have. This paper has two aims. The first aim is to assess these deference-based arguments for Evidential Uniqueness. I’ll show that these arguments only work given a particular kind of deference principle, and I’ll argue that there are reasons to reject these kinds of principles. The second aim of this paper is to spell out what a plausible generalized deference principle looks like. I’ll start by offering a principled rationale for taking deference to constrain rational belief. Then I’ll flesh out the kind of deference principle suggested by this rationale. Finally, I’ll show that this principle is both more plausible and more general than the principles used in the deference-based arguments for Evidential Uniqueness.
PhilPapers/Archive ID
Upload history
First archival date: 2018-01-08
Latest version: 4 (2018-01-19)
View other versions
Added to PP index

Total views
558 ( #11,524 of 65,513 )

Recent downloads (6 months)
77 ( #9,353 of 65,513 )

How can I increase my downloads?

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