Skip to main content
Article thumbnail
Location of Repository

Should I believe the truth?

By Daniel Whiting


Many philosophers hold that a general norm of truth governs the attitude of believing. In a recent and influential discussion, Krister Bykvist and Anandi Hattiangadi raise a number of serious objections to this view. In this paper, I concede that Bykvist and Hattiangadi’s criticisms might be effective against the formulation of the norm of truth that they consider, but suggest that an alternative is available. After outlining that alternative, I argue that it is not vulnerable to objections parallel to those Bykvist and Hattiangadi advance, although it might initially appear to be. In closing, I consider what bearing the preceding discussion has on important questions concerning the natures of believing and of truth

Topics: B1
Year: 2010
OAI identifier:
Provided by: e-Prints Soton

Suggested articles


  1. (2009). Against content normativity. doi
  2. (2007). Against essential normativity of the mental. doi
  3. (2001). Authority and Estrangement: an Essay on Self Knowledge. doi
  4. (2007). Belief and normativity. doi
  5. (1988). Blindspots. Oxford:
  6. (2003). Does belief have an aim?
  7. (2007). Does thought imply ought? doi
  8. (2005). Doxastic deliberation. doi
  9. (2006). No norm needed: on the aim of belief. doi
  10. (2007). Reasons and impossibility. doi
  11. (2007). The Nature of Normativity. Oxford: doi
  12. (2003). The normativity of content. doi
  13. (2003). Thoughts and norms. doi
  14. (1994). Truth, reason, and the regulation of belief. doi
  15. (2002). Truth. doi
  16. (2004). Understanding People: Normativity and Rationalizing Explanation. doi

To submit an update or takedown request for this paper, please submit an Update/Correction/Removal Request.