{"title":"Pritchard on Veritism and Trivial Truths","authors":"Anumita Shukla, Mayank Bora","doi":"10.1007/s40961-024-00329-0","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p>Proponents of Veritism believe that truth is the sole non-instrumental epistemic good. This view is often taken to entail that all truths should be of equal epistemic value. Hence, it is put under stress by the presence of trivial truths: truths to which we attach relatively little or no epistemic value. Pritchard, in the defense of Veritism, has tried to argue that the best way to understand the implications of Veritism is to think in terms of how an intellectually virtuous inquirer would pursue truth. Furthermore, he thinks that such an inquirer would prefer weighty truths and set aside trivial ones. As such, he thinks that our epistemic disregard for trivial truths is just to be expected given Veritism. We argue that Pritchard’s defense of Veritism fails, and the problem of trivial truths remains a significant challenge for Veritism.</p>","PeriodicalId":41227,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Indian Council of Philosophical Research","volume":"25 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.1000,"publicationDate":"2024-04-03","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Indian Council of Philosophical Research","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s40961-024-00329-0","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"0","JCRName":"PHILOSOPHY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Proponents of Veritism believe that truth is the sole non-instrumental epistemic good. This view is often taken to entail that all truths should be of equal epistemic value. Hence, it is put under stress by the presence of trivial truths: truths to which we attach relatively little or no epistemic value. Pritchard, in the defense of Veritism, has tried to argue that the best way to understand the implications of Veritism is to think in terms of how an intellectually virtuous inquirer would pursue truth. Furthermore, he thinks that such an inquirer would prefer weighty truths and set aside trivial ones. As such, he thinks that our epistemic disregard for trivial truths is just to be expected given Veritism. We argue that Pritchard’s defense of Veritism fails, and the problem of trivial truths remains a significant challenge for Veritism.
期刊介绍:
The Journal of Indian Council of Philosophical Research encourages discussions and debates on the philosophical traditions of India and contemporary philosophy in India while simultaneously continuing its dialogue with the vast wealth of mainstream and alternative Anglo-American and Continental philosophies. Yet, the special place it reserves for philosophical expatiations emanating from the subcontinent happens to be its particular area of interest. Research and interpretations pertaining to pre-modern and modern Indian textual sources across the spectrum, viewed through an innovative lens, are highly welcome. The journal is committed to dissemination of valuable knowledge to discerning readership across the world.
JICPR uncompromisingly emphasises originality of thought and research in the varied philosophical traditions. It also welcomes interdisciplinary engagements with quintessential philosophical questions. From close examination of singular philosophical texts and philosophers through furnishing detailed annotated translations and/or re-readings of extant philosophical conundrums, the journal underscores comprehensiveness of argument and ingenuity of scholarship.