Affective Experience, Desire, and Reasons for Action

What is the role of affective experience in explaining how our desires provide us with reasons for action? When we desire that p, we are thereby disposed to feel attracted to the prospect that p, or to feel averse to the prospect that not-p. In this paper, we argue that affective experiences – including feelings of attraction and aversion – provide us with reasons for action in virtue of their phenomenal character. Moreover, we argue that desires provide us with reasons for action only insofar as they are dispositions to have affective experiences. On this account, affective experience has a central role to play in explaining how desires provide reasons for action

Pluralism about Knowledge

In this paper I consider the prospects for pluralism about knowledge, that is, the view that there is a plurality of knowledge relations. After a brief overview of some views that entail a sort of pluralism about knowledge, I focus on a particular kind of knowledge pluralism I call standards pluralism. Put roughly, standards pluralism is the view that one never knows anything simpliciter. Rather, one knows by this-or-that epistemic standard. Because there is a plurality of epistemic standards, there is a plurality of knowledge relations. In §1 I argue that one can construct an impressive case for standards pluralism. In §2 I clarify the relationship between standards pluralism, epistemic contextualism and epistemic relativism. In §3 I argue that standards pluralism faces a serious objection. The gist of the objection is that standards pluralism is incompatible with plausible claims about the normative role of knowledge. In §4 I finish by sketching the form that a standards pluralist response to this objection might take

Os problemas do fundacionismo

Este trabalho analisa o fundacionismo epistemológico, uma das principais alternativas de resposta ao problema do regresso epistêmico. Em particular, o autor pretende sistematizar aquelas que entende serem as dificuldades básicas que a proposta fundacionista deve superar para resolver satisfatoriamente o problema do regresso. Para tanto, acompanha as duas vertentes principais pelas quais circula o fundacionismo contemporâneo, a saber, a vertente internalista e a vertente externalista. Nesse acompanhamento, as noções de "justificação epistêmica" e de "crença básica" são prioritariamente avaliadas.<br>This work analyses the epistemological foundationism, one of the most important alternatives of answers to the problem of the epistemic return. In particular, the author intends to systematize those he believes to be the basic difficulties that the foundacionist proposal must overcome to solve, reasonably, the problem of return. Thus, he follows the two principal subjects through which the contemporary foundationism moves, namely, the internalistic truth and the externalistic truth. In this follow up, the notions of 'epistemic justification' and of 'basic belief' are preferably evaluated

O mito do conhecimento = The myth of knowledge

Em “O Mito do Conhecimento”, Laurence BonJour defende a tese de que a concepção “falibilista” de conhecimento, assumida de modo preponderante pelos epistemólogos na era pós-Gettier, “está errada”, pois tal concepção “fraca” de conhecimento proporciona pouca satisfação da perspectiva filosófica e é inexistente no âmbito do senso comum, constituindo tão-somente um “mito filosófico