Staff View
Endorsement and inquiry

Descriptive

TitleInfo
Title
Endorsement and inquiry
Name (type = personal)
NamePart (type = family)
Fleisher
NamePart (type = given)
William
NamePart (type = date)
1983-
DisplayForm
William Fleisher
Role
RoleTerm (authority = RULIB)
author
Name (type = personal)
NamePart (type = family)
Sosa
NamePart (type = given)
Ernest
DisplayForm
Ernest Sosa
Affiliation
Advisory Committee
Role
RoleTerm (authority = RULIB)
chair
Name (type = personal)
NamePart (type = family)
Fitelson
NamePart (type = given)
Branden
DisplayForm
Branden Fitelson
Affiliation
Advisory Committee
Role
RoleTerm (authority = RULIB)
co-chair
Name (type = personal)
NamePart (type = family)
Schellenberg
NamePart (type = given)
Susanna
DisplayForm
Susanna Schellenberg
Affiliation
Advisory Committee
Role
RoleTerm (authority = RULIB)
internal member
Name (type = personal)
NamePart (type = family)
Egan
NamePart (type = given)
Andy
DisplayForm
Andy Egan
Affiliation
Advisory Committee
Role
RoleTerm (authority = RULIB)
internal member
Name (type = personal)
NamePart (type = family)
Elga
NamePart (type = given)
Adam
DisplayForm
Adam Elga
Affiliation
Advisory Committee
Role
RoleTerm (authority = RULIB)
outside member
Name (type = corporate)
NamePart
Rutgers University
Role
RoleTerm (authority = RULIB)
degree grantor
Name (type = corporate)
NamePart
School of Graduate Studies
Role
RoleTerm (authority = RULIB)
school
TypeOfResource
Text
Genre (authority = marcgt)
theses
OriginInfo
DateCreated (qualifier = exact)
2018
DateOther (qualifier = exact); (type = degree)
2018-10
CopyrightDate (encoding = w3cdtf)
2018
Place
PlaceTerm (type = code)
xx
Language
LanguageTerm (authority = ISO639-2b); (type = code)
eng
Abstract (type = abstract)
This dissertation is about the epistemology of inquiry. It concerns the appropriate attitudes of inquiry, what epistemic reasons and values such attitudes should be sensitive to, and what kinds of virtues an inquirer should have. I argue that our theories about these attitudes, reasons, and virtues must be revised. This is necessary in light of several problems that the practice of contemporary, organized research raises for traditional epistemological theories. Standard accounts of epistemic rationality and justification fail to properly evaluate contemporary researchers, instead counting them as irrational in their commitments, theory choice, pursuit strategies, evidential evaluations and assertions. This is an unacceptable result: our best epistemic theories should not call our best researchers epistemically irrational for promoting healthy inquiry. We need a new account.

My project seeks to resolve some of these problems in the epistemology inquiry. First, I propose that we recognize the attitude of endorsement: a distinct doxastic attitude, governed by an inclusive kind of epistemic rationality. This is the attitude of resilient commitment and advocacy that researchers have toward their favored theories during inquiry. Recognizing endorsement, along with the inclusive epistemic rationality that governs it, allows us to vindicate the committed advocacy of researchers. This project is the focus of my first two chapters, in which I argue that endorsement eases the tension between individual and collective rationality, promotes beneficial disagreement and distribution of cognitive labor, and solves the biggest problems for conciliationism about disagreement.

The third chapter takes up a related project concerning our understanding of the credences (degrees of belief) of researchers engaged in inquiry. There I argue that (like endorsement), the credences of researchers should be understood as fragmented. That is, these attitudes are compartmentalized to individual projects in a subject's mental life. The final chapter concerns the relationship between virtues of inquiry and virtues that constitute knowledge. This project is another attempt to alleviate tensions between our traditional epistemic theories and the practice of inquiry. I argue that the intellectual character virtues investigated by virtue responsibilists are virtues of inquiry. They gain their epistemic import by promoting healthy inquiry, in a way that supports the reliabilist virtues (or competences) that constitute knowledge. This removes the apparent conflict between the two factions of virtue epistemology, while at the same time explaining the epistemic value of intellectual character virtues by appeal to their role in inquiry, and their indirect connection to knowledge.

This dissertation is written on the new, multiple-paper model. That is, it consists in a collection of independent papers in the epistemology of inquiry. They are thematically linked, but I have not altered them significantly from their individual forms. They can thus each be read independently.
Subject (authority = RUETD)
Topic
Philosophy
Subject (authority = ETD-LCSH)
Topic
Inquiry (Theory of knowledge)
RelatedItem (type = host)
TitleInfo
Title
Rutgers University Electronic Theses and Dissertations
Identifier (type = RULIB)
ETD
Identifier
ETD_9108
PhysicalDescription
Form (authority = gmd)
electronic resource
InternetMediaType
application/pdf
InternetMediaType
text/xml
Extent
1 online resource (156 pages) : illustrations
Note (type = degree)
Ph.D.
Note (type = bibliography)
Includes bibliographical references
Note (type = statement of responsibility)
by William Fleisher
RelatedItem (type = host)
TitleInfo
Title
School of Graduate Studies Electronic Theses and Dissertations
Identifier (type = local)
rucore10001600001
Location
PhysicalLocation (authority = marcorg); (displayLabel = Rutgers, The State University of New Jersey)
NjNbRU
Identifier (type = doi)
doi:10.7282/t3-z234-rj23
Genre (authority = ExL-Esploro)
ETD doctoral
Back to the top

Rights

RightsDeclaration (ID = rulibRdec0006)
The author owns the copyright to this work.
RightsHolder (type = personal)
Name
FamilyName
Fleisher
GivenName
William
Role
Copyright Holder
RightsEvent
Type
Permission or license
DateTime (encoding = w3cdtf); (qualifier = exact); (point = start)
2018-07-20 15:05:22
AssociatedEntity
Name
William Fleisher
Role
Copyright holder
Affiliation
Rutgers University. School of Graduate Studies
AssociatedObject
Type
License
Name
Author Agreement License
Detail
I hereby grant to the Rutgers University Libraries and to my school the non-exclusive right to archive, reproduce and distribute my thesis or dissertation, in whole or in part, and/or my abstract, in whole or in part, in and from an electronic format, subject to the release date subsequently stipulated in this submittal form and approved by my school. I represent and stipulate that the thesis or dissertation and its abstract are my original work, that they do not infringe or violate any rights of others, and that I make these grants as the sole owner of the rights to my thesis or dissertation and its abstract. I represent that I have obtained written permissions, when necessary, from the owner(s) of each third party copyrighted matter to be included in my thesis or dissertation and will supply copies of such upon request by my school. I acknowledge that RU ETD and my school will not distribute my thesis or dissertation or its abstract if, in their reasonable judgment, they believe all such rights have not been secured. I acknowledge that I retain ownership rights to the copyright of my work. I also retain the right to use all or part of this thesis or dissertation in future works, such as articles or books.
Copyright
Status
Copyright protected
Availability
Status
Open
Reason
Permission or license
Back to the top

Technical

RULTechMD (ID = TECHNICAL1)
ContentModel
ETD
OperatingSystem (VERSION = 5.1)
windows xp
CreatingApplication
Version
1.5
ApplicationName
pdfTeX-1.40.19
DateCreated (point = end); (encoding = w3cdtf); (qualifier = exact)
2018-07-20T14:50:22
DateCreated (point = end); (encoding = w3cdtf); (qualifier = exact)
2018-07-20T14:50:22
Back to the top
Version 8.5.5
Rutgers University Libraries - Copyright ©2024