When is epistemic dependence disvaluable?

Thought: A Journal of Philosophy 10 (3):178-187 (2021)
  Copy   BIBTEX

Abstract

There clearly seems to be something problematic with certain forms of epistemic dependence. However, it has proved surprisingly difficult to articulate what this problem is exactly. My aim in this paper is to make clear when it is problematic to rely on others or on artefacts and technologies that are external to us for the acquisition and maintenance of our beliefs, and why. In order to do so, I focus on the neuromedia thought experiment. After having rejected different ways in which one might want to capture the intuition in question, I argue that this device deprives us of understanding and therefore of the most valuable epistemic good. I then address the question of whether the moral of the story is that we should not develop, be equipped with, or use devices such as the neuromedia.

Other Versions

No versions found

Links

PhilArchive



    Upload a copy of this work     Papers currently archived: 101,551

External links

Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server

Through your library

Analytics

Added to PP
2021-04-22

Downloads
71 (#297,023)

6 months
23 (#133,289)

Historical graph of downloads
How can I increase my downloads?

Author's Profile

Benoit Gaultier
University of Zürich

Citations of this work

On epistemic dependence.А. А Шевченко - 2024 - Siberian Journal of Philosophy 22 (1):16-26.

Add more citations

References found in this work

Understanding Why.Alison Hills - 2015 - Noûs 49 (2):661-688.
In defense of moral testimony.Paulina Sliwa - 2012 - Philosophical Studies 158 (2):175-195.
Moral Testimony: A Re-Conceived Understanding Explanation.Laura Callahan - 2018 - Philosophical Quarterly 68 (272):437-459.

View all 17 references / Add more references