Deontological evidentialism, wide-scope, and privileged values

Philosophical Studies 174 (2):485-506 (2017)
Download Edit this record How to cite View on PhilPapers
Deontological evidentialism is the claim that we ought to form and maintain our beliefs in accordance with our evidence. In this paper, I criticize two arguments in its defense. I begin by discussing Berit Broogard’s use of the distinction between narrow-scope and wide-scope requirements against W.K. Clifford’s moral defense of. I then use this very distinction against a defense of inspired by Stephen Grimm’s more recent claims about the moral source of epistemic normativity. I use this distinction once again to argue that Hilary Kornblith’s criticism of Richard Feldman’s defense of is incomplete. Finally, I argue that Feldman’s defense is insensitive to the relation between normative requirements and privileged values: values that have normative authority over us.
PhilPapers/Archive ID
Revision history
First archival date: 2016-08-30
Latest version: 2 (2017-01-09)
View upload history
References found in this work BETA
The Domain of Reasons.Skorupski, John
Why Be Rational?Kolodny, Niko
The Sources of Normativity.Korsgaard, Christine
The Moral Problem.Smith, Michael

View all 45 references / Add more references

Citations of this work BETA
Clifford, William Kingdom.Oliveira, Luis R. G.

Add more citations

Added to PP index

Total views
497 ( #7,017 of 45,642 )

Recent downloads (6 months)
96 ( #6,187 of 45,642 )

How can I increase my downloads?

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