信仰的实用形而上学

Eric Schwitzgebel
{"title":"信仰的实用形而上学","authors":"Eric Schwitzgebel","doi":"10.1093/oso/9780198850670.003.0015","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"On an intellectualist approach to belief, the intellectual endorsement of a proposition (such as ‘The working poor deserve as much respect as the handsomely paid’) is sufficient or nearly sufficient for believing it. On a pragmatic approach to belief, intellectual endorsement is not enough. Belief is behaviorally demanding. To really, fully believe, you must also ‘walk the walk.’ This chapter argues that the pragmatic approach is preferable on pragmatic grounds: It rightly directs our attention to what matters most in thinking about belief. A pragmatic, walk-the-walk approach to belief better expresses our values, keeps our disciplinary focus in the right place, and encourages salutary self-examination.","PeriodicalId":149092,"journal":{"name":"The Fragmented Mind","volume":"61 12","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2021-07-29","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"10","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"The Pragmatic Metaphysics of Belief\",\"authors\":\"Eric Schwitzgebel\",\"doi\":\"10.1093/oso/9780198850670.003.0015\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"On an intellectualist approach to belief, the intellectual endorsement of a proposition (such as ‘The working poor deserve as much respect as the handsomely paid’) is sufficient or nearly sufficient for believing it. On a pragmatic approach to belief, intellectual endorsement is not enough. Belief is behaviorally demanding. To really, fully believe, you must also ‘walk the walk.’ This chapter argues that the pragmatic approach is preferable on pragmatic grounds: It rightly directs our attention to what matters most in thinking about belief. A pragmatic, walk-the-walk approach to belief better expresses our values, keeps our disciplinary focus in the right place, and encourages salutary self-examination.\",\"PeriodicalId\":149092,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"The Fragmented Mind\",\"volume\":\"61 12\",\"pages\":\"0\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2021-07-29\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"10\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"The Fragmented Mind\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1093/oso/9780198850670.003.0015\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"The Fragmented Mind","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1093/oso/9780198850670.003.0015","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 10

摘要

从理智主义的观点来看,对一个命题的理智认可(比如“穷人和高薪的人一样值得尊重”)就足以或几乎足以让人相信这个命题。以务实的态度对待信仰,智力上的认可是不够的。信念是行为要求。要真正地、完全地相信,你也必须做到。本章认为,基于实用主义的理由,实用主义方法更可取:它正确地将我们的注意力引向思考信仰时最重要的东西。一种务实的、实事求是的信仰方式能更好地表达我们的价值观,使我们的纪律焦点保持在正确的位置,并鼓励有益的自我反省。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
The Pragmatic Metaphysics of Belief
On an intellectualist approach to belief, the intellectual endorsement of a proposition (such as ‘The working poor deserve as much respect as the handsomely paid’) is sufficient or nearly sufficient for believing it. On a pragmatic approach to belief, intellectual endorsement is not enough. Belief is behaviorally demanding. To really, fully believe, you must also ‘walk the walk.’ This chapter argues that the pragmatic approach is preferable on pragmatic grounds: It rightly directs our attention to what matters most in thinking about belief. A pragmatic, walk-the-walk approach to belief better expresses our values, keeps our disciplinary focus in the right place, and encourages salutary self-examination.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
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
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
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 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信