The right to believe truth paradoxes of moral regret for no belief and the role(s) of logic in philosophy of religion
I offer you some theories of intellectual obligations and rights (virtue Ethics): initially, RBT (a Right to Believe Truth, if something is true it follows one has a right to believe it), and, NDSM (one has no right to believe a contradiction, i.e., No right to commit Doxastic Self-Mutilation). Evid...
| Main Author: | |
|---|---|
| Format: | Electronic Article |
| Language: | English |
| Check availability: | HBZ Gateway |
| Journals Online & Print: | Drawer...
|
| Fernleihe: | Fernleihe für die Fachinformationsdienste |
| Published: |
Springer Science + Business Media B. V
2012
|
| In: |
International journal for philosophy of religion
Year: 2012, Volume: 72, Issue: 2, Pages: 115-138 |
| Further subjects: | B
Intellectual obligation
B Deontic logics B Concepts of belief B Variations on Clifford’s thesis B Categorical moral truth B Moral regret for no faith B Modal logics B Philosophy of religion and philosophy B Virtue Ethics B Necessity and time |
| Online Access: |
Volltext (JSTOR) Volltext (lizenzpflichtig) |
| Parallel Edition: | Electronic
|
MARC
| LEADER | 00000naa a22000002 4500 | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| 001 | 1821418204 | ||
| 003 | DE-627 | ||
| 005 | 20221110052731.0 | ||
| 007 | cr uuu---uuuuu | ||
| 008 | 221110s2012 xx |||||o 00| ||eng c | ||
| 024 | 7 | |a 10.1007/s11153-012-9371-4 |2 doi | |
| 035 | |a (DE-627)1821418204 | ||
| 035 | |a (DE-599)KXP1821418204 | ||
| 040 | |a DE-627 |b ger |c DE-627 |e rda | ||
| 041 | |a eng | ||
| 084 | |a 0 |2 ssgn | ||
| 100 | 1 | |a Lucas, Billy Joe |e VerfasserIn |4 aut | |
| 245 | 1 | 4 | |a The right to believe truth paradoxes of moral regret for no belief and the role(s) of logic in philosophy of religion |
| 264 | 1 | |c 2012 | |
| 336 | |a Text |b txt |2 rdacontent | ||
| 337 | |a Computermedien |b c |2 rdamedia | ||
| 338 | |a Online-Ressource |b cr |2 rdacarrier | ||
| 520 | |a I offer you some theories of intellectual obligations and rights (virtue Ethics): initially, RBT (a Right to Believe Truth, if something is true it follows one has a right to believe it), and, NDSM (one has no right to believe a contradiction, i.e., No right to commit Doxastic Self-Mutilation). Evidence for both below. Anthropology, Psychology, computer software, Sociology, and the neurosciences prove things about human beliefs, and History, Economics, and comparative law can provide evidence of value about theories of rights. However, insofar as we have methods within Philosophy to help us formulate precise concepts of ‘belief’ and ‘rights’, methods that also help us to prove links (or absence thereof) amongst families of concepts of rights and belief, our discipline is in and of itself capable of sound reasoning about issues as puzzling as the following. Suppose a Jane who does not believe in God yet who believes she ought to so believe: Jane is undergoing doxastic moral regret (moral regret for lack of faith). We have all known such Janes and perhaps at one time or another even been one. Paradox: given RBT and NDSM, Jane as described not only does not exist, Jane cannot exist. Thus, to enrich the ways in which Philosophy need not get all its evidence from other academic disciplines, I present a brief introduction to what I call Neutral Universal Frames (NUFs). NUFs solve hard puzzles about interactions among modal concepts of belief and rights, concepts that occur in RBT, NDSM and the description of our Janes. NUFs for theories precisely articulated via any two or more modal concepts are a powerful and immensely general set of tools enabling us to define rich theories of truth (“models on frames”) to test philosophical theories for internal consistency and to prove the existence of connections (or absence thereof) amongst alternative articulations of philosophical theories. NUFs thereby add to the constructive knowledge producing way Logics intersect with Philosophy of Religion. And we will soon see why Jane, be she named ‘Jane’ or known simply as you: cannot exist. Read on at your own risk. | ||
| 601 | |a Philosophie | ||
| 601 | |a Religion | ||
| 650 | 4 | |a Deontic logics | |
| 650 | 4 | |a Concepts of belief | |
| 650 | 4 | |a Intellectual obligation | |
| 650 | 4 | |a Variations on Clifford’s thesis | |
| 650 | 4 | |a Necessity and time | |
| 650 | 4 | |a Categorical moral truth | |
| 650 | 4 | |a Moral regret for no faith | |
| 650 | 4 | |a Virtue Ethics | |
| 650 | 4 | |a Modal logics | |
| 650 | 4 | |a Philosophy of religion and philosophy | |
| 773 | 0 | 8 | |i Enthalten in |t International journal for philosophy of religion |d Dordrecht [u.a.] : Springer Science + Business Media B.V, 1970 |g 72(2012), 2, Seite 115-138 |h Online-Ressource |w (DE-627)320442098 |w (DE-600)2005049-5 |w (DE-576)103746927 |x 1572-8684 |7 nnns |
| 773 | 1 | 8 | |g volume:72 |g year:2012 |g number:2 |g pages:115-138 |
| 776 | |i Erscheint auch als |n elektronische Ausgabe |w (DE-627)1631103768 |k Electronic | ||
| 856 | |3 Volltext |u http://www.jstor.org/stable/23324793 |x JSTOR | ||
| 856 | 4 | 0 | |u https://doi.org/10.1007/s11153-012-9371-4 |x Resolving-System |z lizenzpflichtig |3 Volltext |
| 935 | |a mteo | ||
| 936 | u | w | |d 72 |j 2012 |e 2 |h 115-138 |
| 951 | |a AR | ||
| ELC | |a 1 | ||
| ITA | |a 1 |t 1 | ||
| LOK | |0 000 xxxxxcx a22 zn 4500 | ||
| LOK | |0 001 4208222212 | ||
| LOK | |0 003 DE-627 | ||
| LOK | |0 004 1821418204 | ||
| LOK | |0 005 20221110052731 | ||
| LOK | |0 008 221110||||||||||||||||ger||||||| | ||
| LOK | |0 035 |a (DE-Tue135)IxTheo#2022-09-28#CB341505B7C2B8881BC95153F23DAA3BE866E5EC | ||
| LOK | |0 040 |a DE-Tue135 |c DE-627 |d DE-Tue135 | ||
| LOK | |0 092 |o n | ||
| LOK | |0 852 |a DE-Tue135 | ||
| LOK | |0 852 1 |9 00 | ||
| LOK | |0 866 |x JSTOR#http://www.jstor.org/stable/23324793 | ||
| LOK | |0 935 |a ixzs |a ixrk |a zota | ||
| ORI | |a SA-MARC-ixtheoa001.raw | ||
| REL | |a 1 | ||
| SUB | |a REL | ||