Justification magnets

C. S. I.  Jenkins

doi:10.1007/s11098-013-0093-y

Justification magnets

C. S. I. Jenkins

Philosophy

Research output: Contribution to journal › Article › peer-review

4 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

David Lewis is associated with the controversial thesis that some properties are more eligible than others to be the referents of our predicates solely in virtue of those properties’ being more natural; independently, that is, of anything to do with our patterns of usage of the relevant predicates. On such a view, the natural properties act as ‘reference magnets’. In this paper I explore (though I do not endorse) a related thesis in epistemology: that some propositions are ‘justification magnets’. According to the doctrine of justification magnetism, we have better justification for some propositions than for others solely in virtue of certain features of those propositions; independently, that is, of anything to do with evidential support or cognitive accomplishment. In the course of discussing an objection to justification magnetism I describe (though I do not endorse) a novel approach to epistemology akin to interpretationism in the theory of reference.

Original language	English
Pages (from-to)	93-111
Number of pages	19
Journal	Philosophical Studies
Volume	164
Issue number	1
Early online date	18 Jan 2013
DOIs	https://doi.org/10.1007/s11098-013-0093-y
Publication status	Published - May 2013

Bibliographical note

Many thanks to Trent Dougherty, Jonathan Jenkins Ichikawa, Daniel Nolan, Brian Weatherson, and J. Robert G. Williams for comments on earlier drafts, to participants at the University of British Columbia Spring Colloquium 2012, participants at the Paris-Sorbonne Metaphysical Knowledge Conference 2012, participants at the Northern Institute of Philosophy Conference on the A Priori 2012, especially my commentator Aidan McGlynn, participants at the Leeds Indeterminacy Workshop of June 2012, and participants at the Bellingham Summer Philosophy Conference 2012, especially my commentators Andrew Bailey and Sophie Horowitz. I acknowledge receipt of many excellent comments and suggestions that I’m unable to do full justice to in this paper, but hope to pursue in further work.

Keywords

justification
reference
reference magnets
David Lewis
epistemiology
interpretationism

Access to Document

10.1007/s11098-013-0093-yLicence: Unspecified

Cite this

@article{6e8b6ea10c544a51bb6e5952f2205e35,

title = "Justification magnets",

abstract = "David Lewis is associated with the controversial thesis that some properties are more eligible than others to be the referents of our predicates solely in virtue of those properties{\textquoteright} being more natural; independently, that is, of anything to do with our patterns of usage of the relevant predicates. On such a view, the natural properties act as {\textquoteleft}reference magnets{\textquoteright}. In this paper I explore (though I do not endorse) a related thesis in epistemology: that some propositions are {\textquoteleft}justification magnets{\textquoteright}. According to the doctrine of justification magnetism, we have better justification for some propositions than for others solely in virtue of certain features of those propositions; independently, that is, of anything to do with evidential support or cognitive accomplishment. In the course of discussing an objection to justification magnetism I describe (though I do not endorse) a novel approach to epistemology akin to interpretationism in the theory of reference.",

keywords = "justification, reference, reference magnets, David Lewis, epistemiology, interpretationism",

author = "Jenkins, {C. S. I.}",

note = "Many thanks to Trent Dougherty, Jonathan Jenkins Ichikawa, Daniel Nolan, Brian Weatherson, and J. Robert G. Williams for comments on earlier drafts, to participants at the University of British Columbia Spring Colloquium 2012, participants at the Paris-Sorbonne Metaphysical Knowledge Conference 2012, participants at the Northern Institute of Philosophy Conference on the A Priori 2012, especially my commentator Aidan McGlynn, participants at the Leeds Indeterminacy Workshop of June 2012, and participants at the Bellingham Summer Philosophy Conference 2012, especially my commentators Andrew Bailey and Sophie Horowitz. I acknowledge receipt of many excellent comments and suggestions that I{\textquoteright}m unable to do full justice to in this paper, but hope to pursue in further work.",

year = "2013",

month = may,

doi = "10.1007/s11098-013-0093-y",

language = "English",

volume = "164",

pages = "93--111",

journal = "Philosophical Studies",

issn = "0031-8116",

publisher = "Springer Netherlands",

number = "1",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Justification magnets

AU - Jenkins, C. S. I.

N1 - Many thanks to Trent Dougherty, Jonathan Jenkins Ichikawa, Daniel Nolan, Brian Weatherson, and J. Robert G. Williams for comments on earlier drafts, to participants at the University of British Columbia Spring Colloquium 2012, participants at the Paris-Sorbonne Metaphysical Knowledge Conference 2012, participants at the Northern Institute of Philosophy Conference on the A Priori 2012, especially my commentator Aidan McGlynn, participants at the Leeds Indeterminacy Workshop of June 2012, and participants at the Bellingham Summer Philosophy Conference 2012, especially my commentators Andrew Bailey and Sophie Horowitz. I acknowledge receipt of many excellent comments and suggestions that I’m unable to do full justice to in this paper, but hope to pursue in further work.

PY - 2013/5

Y1 - 2013/5

N2 - David Lewis is associated with the controversial thesis that some properties are more eligible than others to be the referents of our predicates solely in virtue of those properties’ being more natural; independently, that is, of anything to do with our patterns of usage of the relevant predicates. On such a view, the natural properties act as ‘reference magnets’. In this paper I explore (though I do not endorse) a related thesis in epistemology: that some propositions are ‘justification magnets’. According to the doctrine of justification magnetism, we have better justification for some propositions than for others solely in virtue of certain features of those propositions; independently, that is, of anything to do with evidential support or cognitive accomplishment. In the course of discussing an objection to justification magnetism I describe (though I do not endorse) a novel approach to epistemology akin to interpretationism in the theory of reference.

AB - David Lewis is associated with the controversial thesis that some properties are more eligible than others to be the referents of our predicates solely in virtue of those properties’ being more natural; independently, that is, of anything to do with our patterns of usage of the relevant predicates. On such a view, the natural properties act as ‘reference magnets’. In this paper I explore (though I do not endorse) a related thesis in epistemology: that some propositions are ‘justification magnets’. According to the doctrine of justification magnetism, we have better justification for some propositions than for others solely in virtue of certain features of those propositions; independently, that is, of anything to do with evidential support or cognitive accomplishment. In the course of discussing an objection to justification magnetism I describe (though I do not endorse) a novel approach to epistemology akin to interpretationism in the theory of reference.

KW - justification

KW - reference

KW - reference magnets

KW - David Lewis

KW - epistemiology

KW - interpretationism

U2 - 10.1007/s11098-013-0093-y

DO - 10.1007/s11098-013-0093-y

M3 - Article

SN - 0031-8116

VL - 164

SP - 93

EP - 111

JO - Philosophical Studies

JF - Philosophical Studies

IS - 1

ER -

Justification magnets

Abstract

Bibliographical note

Keywords

Access to Document

Fingerprint

Cite this