Rational Defeat Beyond Belief

Abstract

Epistemologists typically discuss defeat as applying to beliefs and other cognitive states. But many other kinds of mental states can also be defeated, including emotions. This article argues that there are strong structural analogies between the rational defeat of beliefs and the rational defeat of other kinds of mental states, analogies that call for a unified explanation. In the case of belief, there are at least three ways evidence can have a defeating effect: It can act as a rebutter, an undercutter, or a higher‐order defeater. Many other kinds of mental states can also be defeated in each of these three ways. This suggests that there is a general account of rational defeat that applies across mental states. This article develops such an account, according to which defeat concerns the fittingness of mental states.