Epistemic restraint and the vice of curiosity

Philosophy 87 (2):239-259 (2012)
  Copy   BIBTEX

Abstract

In recent years there has been wide-ranging discussion of epistemic virtues. Given the value and importance of acquiring knowledge this discussion has tended to focus upon those traits that are relevant to the acquisition of knowledge. This acquisitionist focus ignores or downplays the importance of epistemic restraint: refraining from seeking knowledge. In contrast, in many periods of history, curiosity was viewed as a vice. By drawing upon critiques of curiositas in Middle Platonism and Early Christian philosophy, we gain useful insights into the value and importance of epistemic restraint. The historical discussion paves the way for a clarification of epistemic restraint, one that distinguishes the morally relevant features of epistemic process, content, purpose, and context. Epistemic restraint is identified as an important virtue where our epistemic pursuits pose risks and burdens, where such pursuits have opportunity costs, where they are pursued for vicious purposes. But it is in the social realm where epistemic restraint has most purchase, epistemic restraint is important both because privacy is important and because being trusted are important. Finally, some suggestions are offered as to why epistemic restraint has not received the contemporary attention that it deserves

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

Similar books and articles

Political self-deception and epistemic vice.Neil C. Manson - 2020 - Ethics and Global Politics 13 (4):6-15.
Epistemic Consequentialism.Kristoffer Ahlstrom-Vij & Jeff Dunn (eds.) - 2018 - Oxford: Oxford University Press.
The Problems with the Burdens of Judgment.Gozde Hussain - 2018 - Philosophy and Public Issues - Filosofia E Questioni Pubbliche 8 (1):155-192.
Some Epistemic Roles for Curiosity.Dennis Whitcomb - 2018 - In Ilhan Inan, Lani Watson, Dennis Whitcomb & Safiye Yigit (eds.), The Moral Psychology of Curiosity. Rowman & Littlefield International. pp. 217-238.
Epistemic repugnance four ways.Brian Talbot - 2020 - Synthese 199 (1-2):3001-3022.
Democratic education and curiosity.Marianna Papastephanou - 2023 - Ethics and Education 18 (3-4):331-353.

Analytics

Added to PP
2012-03-15

Downloads
188 (#130,259)

6 months
36 (#111,864)

Historical graph of downloads
How can I increase my downloads?

Author's Profile

Neil Manson
Lancaster University

Citations of this work

Deep Epistemic Vices.Ian James Kidd - 2018 - Journal of Philosophical Research 43:43-67..
The virtue of curiosity.Lewis Ross - 2020 - Episteme 17 (1):105-120.
The Curious Case of the Excellent Gossiper.Alkis Kotsonis - 2021 - Philosophia 50 (3):1207-1222.

View all 11 citations / Add more citations

References found in this work

Epistemic responsibility.Lorraine Code - 1987 - Hanover, N.H.: Published for Brown University Press by University Press of New England.
Why privacy is important.James Rachels - 1975 - Philosophy and Public Affairs 4 (4):323-333.
Epistemic Virtue and Doxastic Responsibility.James Montmarquet - 1992 - American Philosophical Quarterly 29 (4):331-341.

View all 14 references / Add more references