【24h】

Is imagination too liberal for modal epistemology?

机译:想象力太自由了模态认识论吗?

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
       

摘要

Appealing to imagination for modal justification is very common. But not everyone thinks that all imaginings provide modal justification. Recently, Gregory (2010) and Kung (Philos Phenomenol Res 81(3):620-663, 2010) have independently argued that, whereas imaginings with sensory imageries can justify modal beliefs, those without sensory imageries don't because of such imaginings' extreme liberty. In this essay, I defend the general modal epistemological relevance of imagining. I argue, first, that when the objections that target the liberal nature of non-sensory imaginings are adequately developed, those objections also threaten the sensory imaginings. So, if we think that non-sensory imaginings are too liberal for modal justification, we should say the same about sensory imaginings. I'll finish my defense by showing that, when it comes to deciding between saying that all imaginings are prima facie justificatory and saying that no imaginings are justificatory, there is an independent reason for accepting the former.
机译:对模态理由的想象力非常普遍。但不是每个人都认为所有想象都提供了模态理由。最近,格雷戈里(2010年)和Kung(Philos现象Res 81(3):620-663,2010)已经独立辩称,而用感觉成像仪的想象力可以证明模态信念,而没有感官的想象仪,没有因为这样的想象而不是这样的想象力极端自由。在本文中,我捍卫了想象的一般模态认识论相关性。首先,我争辩说,当针对非感知想象的自由性的异议得到充分发展时,那些反对意见也威胁着感官想象。因此,如果我们认为非感知想象对于模态理由太自由,我们应该对感官想象说同样的话。我会通过表明,在决定介于说出所有想象的人之间,据说是初步的正义的,并说没有想象力是一个正义的,那么接受前者的独立原因就会完成辩护。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号