Exclusion and Epistemic Community

IF 0.1 4区 哲学 0 PHILOSOPHY REVUE INTERNATIONALE DE PHILOSOPHIE Pub Date : 2021-09-27 DOI:10.3917/RIP.297.0073
H. Gunn
{"title":"Exclusion and Epistemic Community","authors":"H. Gunn","doi":"10.3917/RIP.297.0073","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"In a post-truth era, taking seriously the assertions of political figures and what other people say on the internet strikes many as irrational and gullible. Let us call this reaction the “incredulous reaction.” In this paper, I consider a common response to the targets of the incredulous reaction: excluding them from activities like debate and discounting their beliefs as relevant to our own. This exclusion is motivated by the assumption that those who continue to place epistemic trust in a post-truth society are acting irrationally. I begin with an argument that we can justifiably exclude irrational persons from our epistemic activities. I then present a conflict that emerges when we take the wellbeing of our epistemic community to be an end in and of itself, and not merely a means for pursuing other epistemic goods. I propose that healthy epistemic communities depend on networks of epistemic trust and on ensuring their members are treated with the epistemic respect they deserve. If we were to adopt the development of a healthy epistemic community as a goal, then excluding others may no longer be a justifiable choice.","PeriodicalId":44846,"journal":{"name":"REVUE INTERNATIONALE DE PHILOSOPHIE","volume":"1 1","pages":"73-96"},"PeriodicalIF":0.1000,"publicationDate":"2021-09-27","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"REVUE INTERNATIONALE DE PHILOSOPHIE","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.3917/RIP.297.0073","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"哲学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"0","JCRName":"PHILOSOPHY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

In a post-truth era, taking seriously the assertions of political figures and what other people say on the internet strikes many as irrational and gullible. Let us call this reaction the “incredulous reaction.” In this paper, I consider a common response to the targets of the incredulous reaction: excluding them from activities like debate and discounting their beliefs as relevant to our own. This exclusion is motivated by the assumption that those who continue to place epistemic trust in a post-truth society are acting irrationally. I begin with an argument that we can justifiably exclude irrational persons from our epistemic activities. I then present a conflict that emerges when we take the wellbeing of our epistemic community to be an end in and of itself, and not merely a means for pursuing other epistemic goods. I propose that healthy epistemic communities depend on networks of epistemic trust and on ensuring their members are treated with the epistemic respect they deserve. If we were to adopt the development of a healthy epistemic community as a goal, then excluding others may no longer be a justifiable choice.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
排他性与认知共同体
在后真相时代,认真对待政治人物的断言和其他人在互联网上所说的话,让许多人感到不理性和容易上当受骗。让我们把这种反应称为“怀疑反应”。在这篇论文中,我认为对怀疑反应目标的一种常见反应是:将他们排除在辩论等活动之外,并将他们的信仰视为与我们自己的信仰相关。这种排斥的动机是假设那些继续在后真相社会中给予认识信任的人的行为是不合理的。我从一个论点开始,我们可以有理由将非理性的人排除在我们的认识活动之外。然后,我提出了一个冲突,当我们把我们的认识共同体的福祉本身作为目的,而不仅仅是追求其他认识商品的手段时,就会出现这种冲突。我建议,健康的认知社区依赖于认知信任网络,并确保其成员得到应有的认知尊重。如果我们以发展一个健康的认识共同体为目标,那么排斥他人可能不再是一个合理的选择。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
0.20
自引率
0.00%
发文量
25
期刊最新文献
Se tromper de bonne foi « Éclipse de raison »François Lamy contre la musique Pensées Imperceptibles in Arnauld and Nicole La psychologie cartésienne turlupinée et l’anthropologie secrète de Pierre Nicole Do We Take Notice of All Our Mental Acts?
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1