Philosophy of rational belief
The problems of characterizing rational belief are fewer than is the case with knowledge, though we presumably believe more things than we know. Knowledge is often defined as a special kind of justified true belief. Fallibilism urges that any of the conditions for knowledge may fail. In the case of rational belief we are dealing with fewer conditions, and withdrawal in the event of failure is less drastic. 2. Talk of beliefs involves problems of intensionality (referential opacity) and intentionality (allusion to believing subjects). But talk of beliefs is not clearly dispensable. Reference both to conscious mental states and to dispositions is needed to account for belief. If belief is to be rational it requires at least adequate evidential support. Belief should largely be determined by evidence but there is a voluntary element which we cannot exclude. Rational belief is not all or nothing acceptance. Paradox results if we do not proportion belief to evidence. 3. We need to consider the rationality of complexes of beliefs. Here two such sets of beliefs are selected for study in their own right, and for purpose of comparison. One comprises beliefs about the historical past, the other, metaphysical theistic
Mealand, David L.
Philosophy
Philosophy of rational belief. The problems of characterizing rational belief are fewer than is the case with knowledge, though we presumably believe more things than we know. Knowledge is often defined as a special kind of justified true belief. Fallibilism urges that any of the conditions for knowledge may fail. In the case of rational belief we are dealing with fewer conditions, and withdrawal in the event of failure is less drastic. 2. Talk of beliefs involves problems of intensionality (referential opacity) and intentionality (allusion to believing subjects). But talk of beliefs is not clearly dispensable. Reference both to conscious mental states and to dispositions is needed to account for belief. If belief is to be rational it requires at least adequate evidential support. Belief should largely be determined by evidence but there is a voluntary element which we cannot exclude. Rational belief is not all or nothing acceptance. Paradox results if we do not proportion belief to evidence. 3. We need to consider the rationality of complexes of beliefs. Here two such sets of beliefs are selected for study in their own right, and for purpose of comparison. One comprises beliefs about the historical past, the other, metaphysical theistic
philosophy rational belief problem characterize rational belief few case knowledge though presumably believe thing know knowledge often define special kind justify true belief condition knowledge may fail case rational belief deal few condition withdrawal event failure less talk beliefs involve problem referential intentionality allusion believe subject talk beliefs clearly reference conscious mental_state disposition need account belief belief rational require least adequate evidential support belief largely determine evidence voluntary element exclude rational belief nothing acceptance paradox proportion belief evidence need_consider rationality complex belief two_set beliefs select study right purpose_comparison comprise beliefs historical past metaphysical theistic