• 文献检索
  • 文档翻译
  • 深度研究
  • 学术资讯
  • Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件
  • 邀请有礼
  • 套餐&价格
  • 历史记录
应用&插件
Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件浏览器插件Mac 客户端Windows 客户端微信小程序
定价
高级版会员购买积分包购买API积分包
服务
文献检索文档翻译深度研究API 文档MCP 服务
关于我们
关于 Suppr公司介绍联系我们用户协议隐私条款
关注我们

Suppr 超能文献

核心技术专利:CN118964589B侵权必究
粤ICP备2023148730 号-1Suppr @ 2026

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验

在他人帮助下保持真实:通过人际承诺实现信念自我控制。

Staying true with the help of others: doxastic self-control through interpersonal commitment.

作者信息

Townsend Leo Charles

机构信息

Department of Philosophy, University of Vienna, Vienna, Austria.

出版信息

Philos Explor. 2019 Jul 15;22(3):243-258. doi: 10.1080/13869795.2019.1641613. eCollection 2019.

DOI:10.1080/13869795.2019.1641613
PMID:31708992
原文链接:https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC6817314/
Abstract

I explore the possibility and rationality of interpersonal mechanisms of doxastic self-control, that is, ways in which individuals can make use of other people in order to get themselves to stick to their beliefs. I look, in particular, at two ways in which people can make interpersonal epistemic commitments, and thereby willingly undertake accountability to others, in order to get themselves to maintain their beliefs in the face of anticipated "epistemic temptations". The first way is through the avowal of belief, and the second is through the establishment of collective belief. I argue that both of these forms of interpersonal epistemic commitment can function as effective tools for doxastic self-control, and, moreover, that the control they facilitate should not be dismissed as irrational from an epistemic perspective.

摘要

我探讨了信念自我控制的人际机制的可能性与合理性,即个体能够利用他人来使自己坚守信念的方式。我特别考察了人们做出人际认知承诺的两种方式,从而自愿对他人负责,以便在面对预期的“认知诱惑”时仍能坚守自己的信念。第一种方式是通过信念的公开宣称,第二种方式是通过集体信念的建立。我认为,这两种人际认知承诺形式都可以作为信念自我控制的有效工具,而且,从认知角度来看,它们所促成的控制不应被视为不合理而不予理会。

相似文献

1
Staying true with the help of others: doxastic self-control through interpersonal commitment.在他人帮助下保持真实:通过人际承诺实现信念自我控制。
Philos Explor. 2019 Jul 15;22(3):243-258. doi: 10.1080/13869795.2019.1641613. eCollection 2019.
2
Explicating the concept of epistemic rationality.阐释认知合理性的概念。
Synthese. 2021;199(1-2):4975-5000. doi: 10.1007/s11229-020-03011-5. Epub 2021 Feb 20.
3
In defense of the one-factor doxastic account: A phenomenal account of delusions.为单因素真信念论辩护:妄想的现象主义说明。
Conscious Cogn. 2021 Sep;94:103181. doi: 10.1016/j.concog.2021.103181. Epub 2021 Aug 18.
4
A Topological Approach to Full Belief.一种关于完全信念的拓扑方法。
J Philos Logic. 2019;48(2):205-244. doi: 10.1007/s10992-018-9463-4. Epub 2018 May 23.
5
Epistemic Blame and the Normativity of Evidence.认知责备与证据的规范性
Erkenntnis. 2021 Jun 14:1-24. doi: 10.1007/s10670-021-00430-9.
6
Deontic-doxastic belief revision and linear system model.道义-信念信念修正与线性系统模型。
Front Psychol. 2022 Aug 11;13:948330. doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2022.948330. eCollection 2022.
7
From Doxastic to Epistemic: A Typology and Critique of Qualitative Interview Styles.从信念到认知:定性访谈风格的类型学与批判
Qual Inq. 2020 Mar;26(3-4):291-305. doi: 10.1177/1077800418810724. Epub 2018 Nov 28.
8
Evaluations of epistemic and practical reasons for belief in a predominantly White U.S. sample of preschoolers.评估美国白人为主的学龄前儿童群体信仰的认知和实践原因。
J Exp Child Psychol. 2022 Nov;223:105499. doi: 10.1016/j.jecp.2022.105499. Epub 2022 Jul 9.
9
In Defence of Modest Doxasticism About Delusions.为关于妄想的适度信念论辩护。
Neuroethics. 2012 Apr;5(1):39-53. doi: 10.1007/s12152-011-9122-8. Epub 2011 Jun 11.
10
The epistemic innocence of motivated delusions.动机性妄想的认知无罪性。
Conscious Cogn. 2015 May;33:490-9. doi: 10.1016/j.concog.2014.10.005. Epub 2014 Nov 6.

本文引用的文献

1
Healthier by precommitment.通过预承诺实现更健康。
Psychol Sci. 2014 Feb;25(2):538-46. doi: 10.1177/0956797613510950. Epub 2014 Jan 3.
2
How we know our own minds: the relationship between mindreading and metacognition.我们如何认识自己的心智:读心术与元认知之间的关系。
Behav Brain Sci. 2009 Apr;32(2):121-38; discussion 138-82. doi: 10.1017/S0140525X09000545.
3
Alive and Well after 25 Years: A Review of Groupthink Research.25年后依然活跃且发展良好:群体思维研究综述
Organ Behav Hum Decis Process. 1998 Feb;73(2/3):116-41. doi: 10.1006/obhd.1998.2758.
4
The effect of verbal commitment and treatment choice on medication compliance in a pediatric setting.
J Behav Med. 1987 Aug;10(4):367-76. doi: 10.1007/BF00846476.