Tommaso Piazza<\/p>\n
Universit\u00e0 di Pavia<\/p>\n
26 May 2017, 16:00<\/strong><\/p>\n Faculdade de Letras de Lisboa<\/strong><\/p>\n Sala Mattos Rom\u00e3o <\/strong>(Departamento de Filosofia)<\/p>\n Abstract:<\/strong> Along with the venerable tradition initiated by John L. Pollock (1986),\u00a0(Def) D is a defeater for E\u2019s support for believing P if and only if E is a reason to believe P and E&D is not a reason to believe that P.\u00a0Def aims to characterise in general terms the role that a reason of a subject S plays when it interacts with other reasons of S in such a way as to destroy or diminish S\u2019s justification based on the latter reasons.\u00a0\u00a0In spite of its undisputed popularity,\u00a0Jake Chandler (2013) has\u00a0convincingly\u00a0argued that Def is flawed.\u00a0In this talk I shall briefly rehearse Chandler\u2019s ingenious objection against Pollock\u2019s principle. Since Chandler has also proposed a new principle to replace Def, I shall\u00a0address this principle, and criticize it by arguing that it seems unsuited to detect the role exerted by rebutting defeaters. On Chandler\u2019s behalf I\u2019ll then consider a possible reply to this objection based on J. Pryor (2013)\u2019s suggestion that all rebutting defeaters are also undercutting defeaters. Although it is initially successful, I will argue that the reply under consideration is ultimately bound to fail because there are rebutting defeaters that, pace<\/em> Pryor, are not also undercutting defeaters. Finally, I shall defend a new principle that is more faithful to the spirit of Pollock\u2019s original characterization. I will conclude by arguing that this new principle does not fall afoul of the problems afflicting Pollock\u2019s characterization and the one with which Chandler has proposed to replace it.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":" Tommaso Piazza Universit\u00e0 di Pavia On What a Defeater Is 26 May 2017, 16:00 Faculdade de Letras de Lisboa Sala Mattos Rom\u00e3o (Departamento de Filosofia) Abstract: Along with the venerable tradition initiated by John L. Pollock (1986),\u00a0(Def) D is a defeater for E\u2019s support for believing P if and only if E is a reason […]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":2,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"activitypub_content_warning":"","activitypub_content_visibility":"","activitypub_max_image_attachments":4,"activitypub_interaction_policy_quote":"","activitypub_status":"","footnotes":""},"categories":[1],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-443","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-uncategorized"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/cful.letras.ulisboa.pt\/lancog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/443","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/cful.letras.ulisboa.pt\/lancog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/cful.letras.ulisboa.pt\/lancog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/cful.letras.ulisboa.pt\/lancog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/2"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/cful.letras.ulisboa.pt\/lancog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=443"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/cful.letras.ulisboa.pt\/lancog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/443\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/cful.letras.ulisboa.pt\/lancog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=443"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/cful.letras.ulisboa.pt\/lancog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=443"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/cful.letras.ulisboa.pt\/lancog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=443"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}