{"title":"兰伯特论道德确定性和归纳法的正当性","authors":"Aaron Wells","doi":"10.1080/0020174x.2024.2356158","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":": I reconstruct J. H. Lambert’s views on how practical grounds relate to epistemic features, such as certainty. I argue, first, that Lambert’s account of moral certainty does not involve any distinctively practical influence on theoretical belief. However, it does present an interesting form of fallibilism about justification as well as a denial of a tight link between knowledge and action. Second, I argue that for Lambert, the persistence principle that underwrites induction is supported by practical reasons to believe; this indicates that Lambert is a moderate pragmatist about reasons for theoretical belief.","PeriodicalId":501542,"journal":{"name":"Inquiry","volume":"117 20","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-05-23","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Lambert on moral certainty and the justification of induction\",\"authors\":\"Aaron Wells\",\"doi\":\"10.1080/0020174x.2024.2356158\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\": I reconstruct J. H. Lambert’s views on how practical grounds relate to epistemic features, such as certainty. I argue, first, that Lambert’s account of moral certainty does not involve any distinctively practical influence on theoretical belief. However, it does present an interesting form of fallibilism about justification as well as a denial of a tight link between knowledge and action. Second, I argue that for Lambert, the persistence principle that underwrites induction is supported by practical reasons to believe; this indicates that Lambert is a moderate pragmatist about reasons for theoretical belief.\",\"PeriodicalId\":501542,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Inquiry\",\"volume\":\"117 20\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-05-23\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Inquiry\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1080/0020174x.2024.2356158\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Inquiry","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/0020174x.2024.2356158","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
摘要
:我重构了兰伯特(J. H. Lambert)关于实践理由与认识论特征(如确定性)之间关系的观点。首先,我认为兰伯特关于道德确定性的论述并不涉及对理论信仰的任何明显的实践影响。然而,它确实提出了一种有趣的关于正当性的无误论形式,以及对知识与行动之间紧密联系的否定。其次,我认为,对兰伯特来说,支撑归纳法的持久性原则是由实际的信仰理由所支持的;这表明兰伯特在理论信仰的理由方面是一个温和的实用主义者。
Lambert on moral certainty and the justification of induction
: I reconstruct J. H. Lambert’s views on how practical grounds relate to epistemic features, such as certainty. I argue, first, that Lambert’s account of moral certainty does not involve any distinctively practical influence on theoretical belief. However, it does present an interesting form of fallibilism about justification as well as a denial of a tight link between knowledge and action. Second, I argue that for Lambert, the persistence principle that underwrites induction is supported by practical reasons to believe; this indicates that Lambert is a moderate pragmatist about reasons for theoretical belief.