Indoctrination anxiety and the etiology of belief

Joshua DiPaolo, Robert Mark Simpson

Research output: Contribution to journalArticleResearchpeer-review

9 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

People sometimes try to call others’ beliefs into question by pointing out the contingent causal origins of those beliefs. The significance of such ‘Etiological Challenges’ is a topic that has started attracting attention in epistemology. Current work on this topic aims to show that Etiological Challenges are, at most, only indirectly epistemically significant, insofar as they bring other generic epistemic considerations to the agent’s attention (e.g. disagreement, consistency with one’s own epistemic standards, evidence of one’s fallibility). Against this approach, we argue that Etiological Challenges are epistemically significant in a more direct and more distinctive way. An Etiological Challenge prompts the agent to assess whether her beliefs result from practices of indoctrination, and whether she should reduce confidence in those beliefs, given the anti-reliability of indoctrination as a method of belief-acquisition. Our analysis also draws attention to some of the ways in which epistemic concerns interact with political issues—e.g. relating to epistemic injustice, identity-based discrimination, and segregation—when we’re thinking about the contingent causal origins of our beliefs.
Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)3079–3098
Number of pages20
JournalSynthese
Volume193
Issue number10
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - 2016

Keywords

  • Indoctrination
  • Etiology
  • Genealogy
  • Disagreement

Cite this