Combining Philosophers

All the ideas for Philodemus, R Feldman / E Conee and Eileen John

unexpand these ideas     |    start again     |     specify just one area for these philosophers


10 ideas

11. Knowledge Aims / A. Knowledge / 4. Belief / a. Beliefs
Involuntary beliefs can still be evaluated [Feldman/Conee]
     Full Idea: Examples confirm that beliefs may be both involuntary and subject to epistemic evaluation.
     From: R Feldman / E Conee (Evidentialism [1985], II)
     A reaction: This is an extremely important point, which summarises the situation with beliefs that arise from (apparent) immediate perception. A belief cannot possibly be knowledge if it has been triggered, but no effort was made to evaluate it.
13. Knowledge Criteria / B. Internal Justification / 3. Evidentialism / b. Evidentialism
Evidentialism is the view that justification is determined by the quality of the evidence [Feldman/Conee]
     Full Idea: What we call 'evidentialism' is the view that the epistemic justification of a belief is determined by the quality of the believer's evidence for the belief.
     From: R Feldman / E Conee (Evidentialism [1985], I)
     A reaction: The immediate question is whether the believer knows the quality of their evidence. A detective might not recognise the crucial clue (like the dog not barking). The definition of 'quality' had better not turn out to be circular. Forgotten evidence?
Beliefs should fit evidence, and if you ought to believe it, then you are justified [Feldman/Conee]
     Full Idea: One epistemically ought to have the doxastic attitudes that fit one's evidence. Being epistemically obligatory is equivalent to being epistemically justified.
     From: R Feldman / E Conee (Evidentialism [1985], III)
     A reaction: It is normal for someone to refuse to accept something, when another person believes the evidence is overwhelming. Evaluation of evidence must include an assessment of what other evidence might turn up.
13. Knowledge Criteria / C. External Justification / 3. Reliabilism / a. Reliable knowledge
If someone rejects good criticism through arrogance, that is irrelevant to whether they have knowledge [Feldman/Conee]
     Full Idea: If an arrogant young physicist refuses to recognise valid criticisms from a senior colleague, his or her character has nothing to do with the epistemic status of their belief in the theory.
     From: R Feldman / E Conee (Evidentialism [1985], III)
     A reaction: This rejects the idea that epistemic justification is essentially a matter of virtues and vices of character. That view is a version of reliabilism, and hence of externalism. I agree with the criticism, but epistemic virtues are still significant.
14. Science / C. Induction / 3. Limits of Induction
From the fact that some men die, we cannot infer that they all do [Philodemus]
     Full Idea: There is no necessary inference, from the fact that men familiar to us die when pierced through the heart, that all men do.
     From: Philodemus (On Signs (damaged) [c.50 BCE], 1.3)
     A reaction: This is scepticism about the logic of induction, long before David Hume. This is said to be a Stoic argument against Epicureans - though on the whole Stoics are not keen on scepticism.
21. Aesthetics / C. Artistic Issues / 7. Art and Morality
A work can be morally and artistically excellent, despite rejecting moral truth [John,E]
     Full Idea: A work that rejects moral truth can be artistically excellent, in part because of its moral content.
     From: Eileen John (Artistic Value and Opportunistic Moralism [2006], Intr)
     A reaction: She cites the film 'Trainspotting', about desperate drug addicts, because it gives an amoral insight into their world.
The works we value most are in sympathy with our own moral views [John,E]
     Full Idea: The works we tend to value most highly are ones that are in sympathy with the moral views we actually accept.
     From: Eileen John (Artistic Value and Opportunistic Moralism [2006], Intro)
     A reaction: I would have to endorse this. She admits that we may rate other works very highly, but they won't appear on our list of favourites. This fact may well distort philosophical discussions of morality and art.
We should understand what is morally important in a story, without having to endorse it [John,E]
     Full Idea: Our responses to literature should show that we grasp whatever counts as morally important within the narrative, but not necessarily that we judge and feel in the way deemed appropriate by the work.
     From: Eileen John (Artistic Value and Opportunistic Moralism [2006], 'Accommodating')
     A reaction: She gives as an example a story by Hemingway which places a high value on the courageous hunting of big game. A second example is the total amorality of a Highsmith novel. This idea seems exactly right to me.
We value morality in art because that is what we care about - but it is a contingent fact [John,E]
     Full Idea: Moral value is valuable in art because people care about moral value. This runs deep, but it is a contingent matter, and the value of morality in art hinges on art's need to provide something precious to us.
     From: Eileen John (Artistic Value and Opportunistic Moralism [2006], 'Contingency')
     A reaction: I think this is exactly right. Thrillers are written with very little moral concern, for a readership which cares about brave and exciting deeds. Even there, violence has its ethics.
23. Ethics / C. Virtue Theory / 3. Virtues / a. Virtues
Don't fear god or worry about death; the good is easily got and the terrible easily cured [Philodemus]
     Full Idea: Don't fear god, Don't worry about death; What is good is easy to get, What is terrible is easy to cure.
     From: Philodemus (Herculaneum Papyrus [c.50 BCE], 1005,4.9-14)
     A reaction: This is known as the Four-Part Cure, and is an epicurean prayer, probably formulated by Epicurus.