The love of truth

It is frequently said that belief aims at truth, in an explicitly normative sense-that is, that one ought to believe the proposition that p if, and only if, p is true. This truth norm is frequently invoked to explain why we should seek evidential justification in our beliefs, or why we should try to...

Full description

Bibliographic Details
Main Author: Hattiangadi, A
Format: Journal article
Language:English
Published: 2010
_version_ 1797104286441668608
author Hattiangadi, A
author_facet Hattiangadi, A
author_sort Hattiangadi, A
collection OXFORD
description It is frequently said that belief aims at truth, in an explicitly normative sense-that is, that one ought to believe the proposition that p if, and only if, p is true. This truth norm is frequently invoked to explain why we should seek evidential justification in our beliefs, or why we should try to be rational in our belief formation-it is because we ought to believe the truth that we ought to follow the evidence in belief revision. In this paper, I argue that this view is untenable. The truth norm clashes with plausible evidential norms in a wide range of cases, such as when we have excellent but misleading evidence for a falsehood or no evidence for a truth. I will consider various ways to resolve this conflict and argue that none of them work. However, I will ultimately attempt to vindicate the love of truth, by arguing that knowledge is the proper epistemic goal. The upshot is that we should not aim merely to believe the truth; we should aim to know it. © 2010.
first_indexed 2024-03-07T06:31:43Z
format Journal article
id oxford-uuid:f632eb36-974a-42ab-9e05-75a1efe4497f
institution University of Oxford
language English
last_indexed 2024-03-07T06:31:43Z
publishDate 2010
record_format dspace
spelling oxford-uuid:f632eb36-974a-42ab-9e05-75a1efe4497f2022-03-27T12:33:21ZThe love of truthJournal articlehttp://purl.org/coar/resource_type/c_dcae04bcuuid:f632eb36-974a-42ab-9e05-75a1efe4497fEnglishSymplectic Elements at Oxford2010Hattiangadi, AIt is frequently said that belief aims at truth, in an explicitly normative sense-that is, that one ought to believe the proposition that p if, and only if, p is true. This truth norm is frequently invoked to explain why we should seek evidential justification in our beliefs, or why we should try to be rational in our belief formation-it is because we ought to believe the truth that we ought to follow the evidence in belief revision. In this paper, I argue that this view is untenable. The truth norm clashes with plausible evidential norms in a wide range of cases, such as when we have excellent but misleading evidence for a falsehood or no evidence for a truth. I will consider various ways to resolve this conflict and argue that none of them work. However, I will ultimately attempt to vindicate the love of truth, by arguing that knowledge is the proper epistemic goal. The upshot is that we should not aim merely to believe the truth; we should aim to know it. © 2010.
spellingShingle Hattiangadi, A
The love of truth
title The love of truth
title_full The love of truth
title_fullStr The love of truth
title_full_unstemmed The love of truth
title_short The love of truth
title_sort love of truth
work_keys_str_mv AT hattiangadia theloveoftruth
AT hattiangadia loveoftruth