Michael Bergmann seeks to motivate his externalist, proper function theory of epistemic justification by providing three objections
to the mentalism and mentalist evidentialism characteristic of nonexternalists such as Richard Feldman and Earl Conee. Bergmann
argues that (i) mentalism is committed to the false thesis that justification depends on mental states; (ii) mentalism is
committed to the false thesis that the epistemic fittingness of an epistemic input to a belief-forming process must be due
to an essential feature of that input, and, relatedly, that mentalist evidentialism is committed to the false thesis that
the epistemic fittingness of doxastic response B to evidence E is an essential property of B–E; and (iii) mentalist evidentialism
is “unmotivated”. I object to each argument. The argument for (i) begs the question. The argument for (ii) suffers from the
fact that mentalist evidentialists are not committed to the consequences claimed for them; nevertheless, I show that there
is, in the neighborhood, a substantive dispute concerning the nature of doxastic epistemic fittingness. That dispute involves
what I call “Necessary Fittingness”, the view that, necessarily, exactly one (at most) doxastic attitude (belief, or disbelief, or suspension of judgment) toward a proposition is epistemically fitting with respect to a person’s total evidence at any time. Reflection on my super-blooper
epistemic design counterexamples to Bergmann’s proper function theory reveals both the plausibility of Necessary Fittingness
and a good reason to deny (iii). Mentalist evidentialism is thus vindicated against the objections. 相似文献
Applied Research in Quality of Life - Is the Easterlin paradox lost, or has it been regained? Scholars have started to debate this topic in recent years. This paper explores the association between... 相似文献
Guided by attachment theory, this longitudinal study examined the mediating role of parent-adolescent attachment on the relation between parents’ attachment styles and adolescents’ regulatory emotional self-efficacy (RESE, including managing negative affect and expressing positive affect). Five hundred seventy-three Chinese junior high school students (46% male; aged 11–14 years, M = 12.76 years, SD = 0.74) completed measures of RESE at T1, parent-adolescent attachment at T2 (six months later), and RESE at T3 (another six months later), while 573 students’ parents (one student only has a parent, 241 fathers and 332 mothers) completed measures of adult attachment styles (anxiety and avoidance) at T1. Results from structural equation modeling indicated that father-adolescent attachment mediated the association between fathers’ attachment anxiety and adolescents’ self-efficacy beliefs in managing negative affect, while mother-adolescent attachment marginally mediated the relation between mothers’ attachment anxiety and adolescents’ self-efficacy beliefs in managing negative affect and expressing positive affect. These findings suggest that parents’ attachment anxiety could predict their children’s attachment to parents, in turn, impacting their children’s regulatory emotional self-efficacy.
Neuropsychology Review - While converging evidence suggests linguistic roles of white matter tracts, detailed associations between white matter alterations of dual pathways and language abilities... 相似文献