关闭

人文科学学院

成立于1986年, the 人文学院 presents a thematic program each semester on a topic related to the humanities. 作为bet360官网下载跨学科教育传统的一部分, 这个项目包括讲座, 会议, 展览, 表演, 和 film series bringing prominent 和 younger cutting-edge scholars to campus.

继续学习人文学院 脸谱网推特!

最新的程序

你最珍视的信仰不是凭空出现的. 你相信你所做的,因为你是谁,你在哪里, 你的个人轨迹, 和, 最终, 导致你生活的事件和思想的漫长历史. This is sometimes emphasized by others as a way to debunk or undermine one’s views. These kinds of objections are familiar: “You just believe that because you’re a woman!” “You just believe that because you’re friends with the defendant!或者“你这么想只是因为你是犹太人。!” These kinds of objections can sometimes succeed in bringing to light one’s biases; other times they seem to miss the mark 和 point out the biases of the objector instead. 如果bet360体育要互相学习, 和 discuss topics of interest within our community 和 think together, we should get clear on the significance of the genealogy of beliefs, 这样bet360体育就能更好地理解, 更精确的测量, bet360体育自己和彼此的信誉. 本学期人文学院将重点关注是否, 为什么, 重要的是什么是bet360体育信仰的起因和起源, 包括那些关于正义的, 道德, 宗教, 美, 和世界.

会议:你只是相信,因为……

2022年4月21 - 22日举行,
Attend in-person at bet360官网下载学院, Outdoor Classroom #1, or virtually via Zoom

时间表

周四,4月21日 变焦链接

1:00–2:30 p.m. 罗杰白色麻省理工学院
病因与分歧: Disagreement-defeat occurs when I lose my justification for a belief by learning of the contrary opinions of others. Etiology-defeat occurs when I lose my justification for a belief by learning of the influence of “irrelevant factors” on my belief. 罗杰白色 once floated the suggestion roughly that Etiology Defeat is parasitic upon Disagreement Defeat—there is no distinctive problem raised by the the dubious causal background of my opinions that doesn’t already arise from the fact that they are not universally shared. 这个建议令人惊讶. Isn’t it obvious that we can have Etiological worries without Disagreement, 和 vice versa? And while similar issues arise, isn’t it clear that the epistemological problems posed are distinct? This paper tries to sort out what was right 和 what was wrong with White’s suggestion, 希望能对这两个问题有所启发.

2:45–4:15 p.m. 卡塔琳娜州Dutilh NovaesVU阿姆斯特丹
Genealogical anxiety, 和 attention 和 trust as higher-order evidence: 信仰系谱的认知相关性是什么? A popular view is that causal origins 和 epistemic justifications come apart. 事实上, 许多人似乎都这么认为, 至少在某些情况下是这样, bet360体育信仰的偶然起源, 一旦发现, will somehow undermine or cast doubt on those beliefs; this is what A. 斯里尼瓦桑将其描述为“谱系焦虑”. 在这个演讲, I propose an account of belief-forming processes that does justice to the role of cultural 和 social factors in these processes, 但也可能在一定程度上减轻家谱焦虑. The account highlights the impact of attention/exposure to ideas 和 beliefs, 以及特定来源的信任关系. I argue that attention 和 trust can be aptly viewed as higher-order evidence, thus being legitimate participants in these (perfectly rational) belief-forming processes. 如果时间允许, I’ll sketch some connections between my proposal 和 Foucault’s thoughts on genealogy, 权力, (知识)的自由.

星期五,4月22日 变焦链接

9:00–10:30 a.m. 亚历山大Prescott-Couch牛津大学
尼采的宗谱论: Nietzsche’s On the Genealogy of Morality (GM) is often interpreted as providing a debunking argument of some kind. I consider different versions of such arguments 和 suggest that they face important challenges. 超越揭露对转基因的解释, I consider Nietzsche’s claim that his genealogy should be used to assess the “value” of moral values. 在解释了如何理解这个说法之后, I consider different ways that history might be used to assess the value of beliefs, 实践, 和机构. 其结果是对宗谱的一般性描述,而不仅仅是揭穿真相.

10:45 a.m.–12:15 p.m. 大卫·索萨但奥斯丁
认知意志的自由

午餐

1:45–3:15 p.m. 亚历克斯Worsnip北卡罗来纳大学教堂山分校
论认识论中的理想论 The Case of Suspiciously Convenient Beliefs: Public life abounds with example of people whose beliefs – especially political beliefs – seem suspiciously convenient: consider, 例如, 认为所有税收都不公平的亿万富翁, or the Supreme Court Justice whose interpretation of what the laws says reliably line up with her personal political convictions. After presenting what I take to be the best argument for the epistemological relevance of suspicious convenience, I’ll diagnose how attempts to resist this argument rest on a kind of epistemological ideal theory. I’ll then argue that the ways in which this ideal theory can be deployed in defense of suspiciously convenient beliefs brings out the pathologies of such ideal theory in epistemology.

3:15–4:00 p.m. 打破/咖啡

4:00–5:30 p.m. 安娜莉莎Coliva加州大学欧文分校
你这么想只是因为它是个铰链 In the growing literature on the contingent origins of belief there is no convergence on the assessment of the epistemic significance of the so-called “etiological challenge”, often expressed by saying “You just believe that because you were brought up to believe it”. In this paper, I look at this challenge through the lens of hinge epistemology. It is claimed that hinges are typically believed just because one has been brought up to believe them (sect. 1), 虽然他们的支持缺乏不容置疑的理由, or having reasons which would not be stronger than the ones in favor of incompatible ones (sect. 2). 然而,, 因为它们的极端可变性, 铰链不合理地握住的情况并不总是这样, 同时适应YJBTB模式. 特别是, they are rationally held when either different hinges are taken for granted merely because of one’s position in history, 或者当它们构成认知理性时. 相比之下, 它们在不同的铰链上是不合理的, 哪些本身不是认知理性的组成部分, are taken for granted while aware of the fact that one’s reasons for them are either question-begging or no stronger than the ones in favor of incompatible ones (sect. 3-4). 因此, looking at the etiological challenge through the lens of hinge epistemology helps elucidate its nature 和 epistemic significance.