Disbelief is a distinct doxastic attitude

Synthese 198 (12):11797-11813 (2020)
Download Edit this record How to cite View on PhilPapers
While epistemologists routinely employ disbelief talk, it is not clear that they really mean it, given that they often equate disbelieving p with believing ¬p. I argue that this is a mistake—disbelief is a doxastic attitude of rejection and is distinct from belief. I first clarify this claim and its opposition, then show that we must distinguish disbelieving p from believing ¬p in order to account for the fact that we continue to hold doxastic attitudes toward propositions that we reject. After defending this argument against some possible objections, I examine several cases that reveal disbelieving p to be not only non-identical to believing ¬p, but independent of that attitude as well. Finally, I sketch some immediate and potential consequences of recognizing disbelief as a distinct doxastic attitude, particularly for work on epistemic rationality.
Reprint years
PhilPapers/Archive ID
Upload history
Archival date: 2020-08-23
View other versions
Added to PP index

Total views
161 ( #34,903 of 2,448,737 )

Recent downloads (6 months)
69 ( #8,730 of 2,448,737 )

How can I increase my downloads?

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