No Reason to Believe: Radical Skepticism, Emergency Power, and Constitutional Constraint

This essay reviews Eric Posner and Adrian Vermeule’s Terror in the Balance: Security, Liberty, and the Courts, which I consider the most serious, sustained, and thoughtful effort to defend the Bush administration’s aggressive tactics in the war on terror yet written. That the book is ultimately deeply flawed only underscores the failure of the Bush administration’s approach. Where most historians view with regret the excesses of past security crises, from the criminalization of speech during World War I to the internment of Japanese Americans during World War II, Posner and Vermeule advance the contrarian view that the system worked exactly as it should have, because in each instance, executive officials took aggressive action in response to perceived security threats, and courts and Congress deferred to or approved of the executive’s initiatives. In Posner and Vermeule’s view, there is no reason to believe that government officials will overreact during times of crisis, and no basis for judging what executive officials have done, because they have the expertise and access to information that the rest of us lack. I argue that Posner and Vermeule’s argument for deference to the executive is misguided for three reasons. First, their assumption that there is a necessary and “straightforward tradeoff between liberty and security” is far too simplistic. Executives often sacrifice liberty without achieving an increase in security. Security may be advanced in a variety of ways without infringing on liberty. There is no reason to assume that sacrificing liberty is necessary to further security or that such sacrifices are warranted simply because the executive chooses to make them. Second, Posner and Vermeule’s account of the political dynamics of emergency periods fails to take into account significant factors that predictably contribute to overreaching by the executive, infringement of human rights, selective targeting of disempowered minority groups, and institutionalization of authorities that last well beyond the emergency itself. Once these factors are properly considered, there are strong reasons not to defer to executive power, especially in emergencies. Third, the authors’ argument that the executive is best situated to balance liberty and security in emergencies fails to consider the full range of qualities that one might want in an agency tasked to strike such a balance. Precisely because we rely so heavily on the executive to maintain our security, we should be skeptical of its ability to give sufficient weight to the liberty side of the balance. Judicial review plays an essential role in achieving an appropriate balance; deference to the executive undermines that role

Can we Describe Possible Circumstances in which we would have

This paper investigates the question whether we could have reason to believe that time is two-dimensional. I connect discussion of this question to discussion of the question whether we could have reason to believe that there has been a global time freeze

Common reason to believe and framing effect in the team reasoning theory: an experimental approach

The present paper is aimed at empirically verifying the role of the “common reason to believe” (Sugden 2003) and of framing (Bacharach 1999 and 2006) within the theory of team reasoning. The analysis draws on data collected trough a Traveler’s Dilemma experiment. To study the role of the common reason to believe, players’ belief in their counterpart’s choice are elicited and the correlation between the endorsement of team reasoning and beliefs is considered. With respect to the idea of frame proposed by Bacharach, we study the effect of the reduction of social distance on the probability that the “we-frame” comes to players’ mind. Social distance is decreased by introducing a meeting between the two players after the game. It is shown that the common reason to believe appropriately explains the internal logic of team reasoning and that the reduction of social distance makes the “we-frame” more likely.Team Reasoning, Common Reason to Believe, Framing, Traveler’s Dilemma; Social Distance

Is There Reason to Believe the Principle of Sufficient Reason?

Shamik Dasgupta (2016) proposes to tame the Principle of Sufficient Reason (PSR) to apply to only non-autonomous facts, which are facts that are apt for explanation. Call this strategy to tame the PSR the taming strategy. In a recent paper, Della Rocca (2020a) argues that proponents of the taming strategy, in attempting to formulate a restricted version of the PSR, nevertheless find themselves committed to endorsing a form of radical monism, which, in turn, leads right back to an untamed-PSR. Suppose, for the sake of argument, that Della Rocca is right. My question is this: Is there reason to believe the principle of sufficient reason (in its untamed version)? In this paper, I argue that it is impossible for there to be a reason to believe the untamed-PSR

Epistemic instrumentalism and the reason to believe in accord with the evidence

Epistemic instrumentalists face a puzzle. In brief, the puzzle is that if the reason there is to believe in accord with the evidence depends, as the instrumentalist says it does, on agents’ idiosyncratic interests, then there is no reason to expect that this reason is universal. Here, I identify and explain two strategies instrumentalists have used to try and solve this puzzle. I then argue that we should find these strategies wanting. Faced with the failure of these strategies, I articulate a heretofore neglected solution on behalf of instrumentalism

Semiotic Analysis on Television Advertisement of Coca Cola “ Reason to Believe : Indonesian Version “

Advertisement is a medium to deliver messages to people with the goal to influence them to use certain products. Semiotics is applied to develop a correlation within the element used in advertisement. In this study, the writer chooses the television advertisement of Coca Cola “ Reason to Believe: Indonesian Version” as the subject to be analyzed using semiotic study based on Peirce's theory. Semiotic approach is employed in interpreting the sign, symbol, icon, and index in television advertisements. This study aims to identify: (1) the semiotic signs found in the Coca Cola advertisement, and (2) the interpretation of semiotic signs in the Coca Cola advertisement.This study is qualitative in the form of document analysis. The data are 20 scenes in the Coca Cola “Reason to Believe : Indonesian Version” TV advertisements. The result of this research shows that each advertisement contains semiotic signs such as symbol, icon and index. There are 20 symbols, 46 icons, and 16 index. Icon is mostly used rather than symbol and index. Text are provides as symbol in most scenes. The text use for emphazing the condition of each scene.Suggestion is made for next researchers to choose the signs of the advertisement from other media sources like radio, newspaper, or the internet, to obtain various results. Next researchers can also conduct further studies by seeing people's interpretation on certain advertisements

Non-Pickwickian Belief and 'the Gettier Problem'

That in Gettier's alleged counterexamples to the traditional analysis of knowledge as justified true belief the belief condition is satisfied has rarely been questioned. Yet there is reason to doubt that a rational person would come to believe what Gettier's protagonists are said to believe in the way they are said to have come to believe it. If they would not, the examples are not counter-examples to the traditional analysis. I go on to discuss a number of examples inspired by Gettier's and argue that they, too, fail to be counter-examples either for reasons similar to those I have urged or because it is not clear that their subject does not know

Message from the president

As an institution committed to civil interchange about the important topics of our time, we believe that discourse, no matter how passionate, can and must be conducted with reason and respect because we also celebrate those values as inherently important to our community