Reconciling Enkrasia and Higher-Order Defeat

Erkenntnis 84 (6):1369-1386 (2019)
Download Edit this record How to cite View on PhilPapers
Titelbaum Oxford studies in epistemology, 2015) has recently argued that the Enkratic Principle is incompatible with the view that rational belief is sensitive to higher-order defeat. That is to say, if it cannot be rational to have akratic beliefs of the form “p, but I shouldn’t believe that p,” then rational beliefs cannot be defeated by higher-order evidence, which indicates that they are irrational. In this paper, I distinguish two ways of understanding Titelbaum’s argument, and argue that neither version is sound. The first version can be shown to rest on a subtle, but crucial, misconstrual of the Enkratic Principle. The second version can be resisted through careful consideration of cases of higher-order defeat. The upshot is that proponents of the Enkratic Principle are free to maintain that rational belief is sensitive to higher-order defeat.
PhilPapers/Archive ID
Upload history
Archival date: 2018-04-30
View other versions
Added to PP index

Total views
370 ( #18,146 of 64,115 )

Recent downloads (6 months)
28 ( #25,534 of 64,115 )

How can I increase my downloads?

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