On the assumption that reasons are facts, we can have no false reasons and we have no reasons for any of our false beliefs. To say that there are no false, justified beliefs at face value is to accept the absurd consequence that none of the false beliefs we hold are held rationally, since they are not capable of any justification whatsoever. Further, since we often cannot tell with any certainty which of our beliefs are true we must be sceptics about most, if not all, of our beliefs. Since we can’t be certain that they’re true, we can’t have any justification for them whatsoever, and further there’s no difference between being rational and being irrational (being epistemically responsible and irresponsible) so long as we’re mistaken.
Rationality is a necessary condition for certain kinds of excuses (including mistaken belief excuses for action), but excuses do not provide justification. Rational/reasonable response to reasons is not the same as the justified response.
Do you find yourself being a sceptic, a rationalist, or a factualist ??? I know that I waiver between being a sceptic and a factualist, but rarely a rationalist.
Head over to
Think Tonk for the original entry :o)
The assumption is the problem...for me.
ReplyDelete