On Transparency: A Response to Nishi Shah's "How Truth Governs Belief".
In his 2003 paper "How Truth Governs Belief" Nishi Shah claims that within first personal doxastic deliberation, one cannot separate the questions whether to believe some proposition p and whether p is true; the questions must be viewed as answered by and answerable to the same set of considerations. He calls this phenomenon transparency, and argues that the only way to explain it is by understanding the concept of belief as being normatively tied to truth. In deliberating about whether to believe we exercise our concept of belief, appreciate its normative connection to truth, and so incite the collapse of these two questions.
What people are saying - Write a review
We haven't found any reviews in the usual places.
agent aimed at truth alethic considerations appreciate the norm belief and truth belief formation belief-constituting disposition beliefs aim beliefs are causally causal influence causally impacted causally regulated causally responsive claim that beliefs claim that truth concept of belief conceptual truth considerations about truth considerations we take correctness for belief deliberative question engaging in doxastic essentially descriptive claims exclusively relevant explain transparency explanation of transparency framing one’s goal heuristic implausible influenced by non-alethic lying partner metaphysical claims Nishi Shah’s non-alethic considerations non-beliefs normativity of truth partner has lied phenomenon of transparency plausible prescription to believe propositional attitudes reason relevant to settling relevant to truth role that truth settling questions Shah claims Shah seems Shah thinks Shah’s dilemma standard of correctness teleological account teleologist about beliefs teleologist needs teleologist’s claim transparency obtains transparency reveals true truth about belief truth for belief Truth Governs Belief truth-regarding considerations unique normative status version of transparency