Epistemische Deferenz

In: Grazer Philosophische Studien

What is the correct epistemic stance that laypeople should take vis-a-vis epistemic authorities? The author provides an answer to this question based on a critical examination of Linda Zagzebski’s Preemption Thesis, according to which the fact that an authority has a belief p is a reason for a layperson to believe p that replaces her other reasons relevant to believing p and is not simply added to them. In contrast, the author argues that epistemic deference requires a layperson to perform a number of epistemic tasks and involves an active and critical stance that conflicts with the Preemption Thesis.

  • Anderson Elizabeth 2011. “Democracy, Public Policy, and Lay Assessments of Scientific Testimony.” Episteme 8144164.

  • Benton Matthew A. 2014: “Believing on Authority.” European Journal for Philosophy of Religion 6133144.

  • Coady David 2012. What to Believe Now: Applying epistemology to contemporary issues. Chichester: Wiley-Blackwell.

  • Douglas Heather 2000. “Inductive Risk and Values in Science.” Philosophy of Science 67559579.

  • Feyerabend Paul 1978. Erkenntnis für freie Menschen. Frankfurt a. M.: Suhrkamp.

  • Finke Peter 2014. Citizen Science: Das unterschätzte Wissen der Laien. München: Oekom.

  • Goldman Alvin I. 2001. “Experts: Which ones should you trust?” Philosophy and Phenomenological Research 6385110.

  • Jäger Christoph 2016. “Epistemic Authority, Preemptive Reasons, and Understanding.” Episteme 13167185.

  • John Stephen . 2011. “Expert Testimony and Epistemological Free-Riding: The mmr Controversy.” Philosophical Quarterly 61496517.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Jones Ward E. 2002. “Dissident Versus Loyalist: Which Scientists Should We Trust?” The Journal of Value Inquiry 36511520.

  • Kagan Shelly . 1989. The Limits of Morality. Oxford: Clarendon.

  • Kuhn Thomas S. 1996. The Structure of Scientific Revolutions. 3rd ed. Chicago: Univ. of Chicago Press.

  • Matheson David 2005. “Conflicting Experts and Dialectical Performance: Adjudication Heuristics for the Layperson.” Argumentation 19145158.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Miller Boaz 2016. “Scientific Consensus and Expert Testimony in Courts: Lessons from the bendectin litigation.” Foundations of Science 211533.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Parfit Derek 2001. “Rationality and Reasons.” In: Exploring Practical Philosophy. Essays in Honour of Ingmar Persson edited by Egonsson D. et al. Aldershot: Ashgate 17–39.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Quine W. V. & Ullian J. S. 1978. The Web of Belief. New York: Random House.

  • Scholz Oliver R. 2009. “Experts: What they are and how we recognize them—a discussion of Alvin Goldman’s views.” Grazer Philosophische Studien 79187205.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Stanley Jason . 2005. Knowledge and Practical Interest. Oxford: Clarendon Press.

  • Weatherson Brian . 2005. “Can We Do without Pragmatic Encroachment?” Philosophical Perspectives 19417443.

  • Zagzebski Linda 2012. Epistemic Authority: A Theory of Trust Authority and Autonomy in Belief. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

  • Zagzebski Linda 2016. “Replies to Christoph Jäger and Elizabeth Fricker.” Episteme 13187194.

Content Metrics

All Time Past Year Past 30 Days
Abstract Views 211 210 21
Full Text Views 136 131 5
PDF Downloads 28 26 5