Knowing Our Limits by Nathan Ballantyne

Author:Nathan Ballantyne [Ballantyne, Nathan]
Language: eng
Format: epub
Tags: Philosophy, Epistemology, Ethics & Moral Philosophy
ISBN: 9780190847289
Google: FBWlDwAAQBAJ
Amazon: 019084728X
Publisher: Oxford University Press
Published: 2019-09-01T19:00:00+00:00

4. O Defeater, Where Art Thou?

The Problem of Counterfactual Interlocutors threatens our controversial convictions by pointing to what seems simple and obvious. Curiously, our discussion could have proceeded without bringing up counterfactual objectors at all. They are a “delivery method,” as it were, for an insight. It is this: we have very likely overlooked or missed defeaters for our controversial opinions. That is the trouble that the problem leads us to contemplate. This problem reveals how we may come to have competence defeaters—reasons to doubt whether we are well-positioned to adopt a reasonable view on the basis of all the things we know through actual inquiry, including contact with actual interlocutors. I said the counterfactual interlocutors would have changed the state of our discussion. They very likely would have given us defeaters for our beliefs. Surprisingly perhaps, the counterfactual interlocutors can still offer us defeaters in a sense even though they cannot speak to us.

I am inclined to measure the seriousness of the problem with the help of an analogy. We hold some controversial view on the basis of our best argument, but we realize that if we had been spending time in the company of geniuses and luminaries, or peers who tend to be critical of the sorts of views we hold, then we’d very likely have reason to doubt that our argument is much good. Now imagine that we are stranded on a deserted island after a three-hour tour gone horribly wrong. We can’t talk with those formidable interlocutors. We are alone. Geographical isolation won’t make our controversial opinion reasonable given that we accept that our argument would very likely be seriously challenged had we been in the company of those interlocutors. Something not unlike that analogy captures our native condition as inquirers. Our reflection on counterfactual interlocutors helps us recognize as much and then adjust our thinking accordingly. We are separated from counterfactual interlocutors and we know that they very likely would take the wind out of our best arguments. We know that if we were not separated from them, and if those interlocutors spoke to us face to face, then very likely we would have defeaters for many of our controversial beliefs. That is enough to see that there are in fact defeaters for many of our opinions.

By thinking about the ways our intellectual communities might have been, we can come to better know our limits. In the next chapter, I return to our actual situation. The world contains a great deal of evidence that concerns our controversial opinions, but we only possess a small fraction of it.

Download

Copyright Disclaimer:
This site does not store any files on its server. We only index and link to content provided by other sites. Please contact the content providers to delete copyright contents if any and email us, we'll remove relevant links or contents immediately.