z-logo
Premium
Reasons for Belief
Author(s) -
GINSBORG Hannah
Publication year - 2006
Publication title -
philosophy and phenomenological research
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 1.7
H-Index - 39
eISSN - 1933-1592
pISSN - 0031-8205
DOI - 10.1111/j.1933-1592.2006.tb00562.x
Subject(s) - doxastic logic , epistemology , argument (complex analysis) , nothing , focus (optics) , philosophy , perception , philosophy of mind , psychology , metaphysics , chemistry , biochemistry , physics , optics
Davidson claims that nothing can count as a reason for a belief except another belief. This claim is challenged by McDowell, who holds that perceptual experiences can count as reasons for beliefs. I argue that McDowell fails to take account of a distinction between two different senses in which something can count as a reason for belief. While a non‐doxastic experience can count as a reason for belief in one of the two senses, this is not the sense which is presupposed in Davidson's claim. While 1 focus on McDowell's view, the argument generalizes to other views which take experiences as reasons for belief.

This content is not available in your region!

Continue researching here.

Having issues? You can contact us here