Three Duties of Epistemic Diligence

Hayward, Tim

doi:10.1111/josp.12319

Cited by 3 publications

(1 citation statement)

References 40 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…It is only with the development of a comprehensively better theory that one can speak of the old one being refuted . It is possible meanwhile to adhere to a degenerating research program even as the rationality of doing so diminishes (Hayward 2019, 545). It is in seeking to understand this adherence to hypotheses of diminishing epistemological rationality that psychological investigations may have a role to play.…”

Section: Conspiracy Theory As Bona Fide Explanationmentioning

confidence: 99%

“Conspiracy theory”: The case for being critically receptive

Hayward

2021

Journal of Social Philosophy

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

INTRODUCTION"Conspiracy theory" is widely used as a pejorative term. An effect of this usage, however, is to discourage certain kinds of legitimate critical inquiry. In a world where conspiracies happen, it is reasonable to seek to formulate good theories of what exactly is happening; and through competent investigation, hypotheses of conspiracy can sometimes be verified. Thus, the general denigration of "conspiracy theory" tends to discourage a kind of practice that there is reason, in fact, to encourage. Of course, this kind of serious inquiry is not necessarily typical of conspiracy theories more generally. Some researchers regard its instances as exceptions to a more general rule whereby conspiracy theories involve unwarranted assumptions and misleading speculation; 1 others maintain-instead or as well-that such investigations as happen to identify a verifiable conspiracy should be exempted from the designation "conspiracy theory" and called something else. 2 However, such suggestions presuppose not only that the grounds of exception or exemption can be clearly specified but also that the specification will be generally understood and applied. But what if neither presupposition turns out to be warranted?That concern is at the heart of this paper: when the pejorative understanding of "conspiracy theory" is allowed to influence policy-making it can serve to legitimate policies whose effect is to impede or even outlaw the kind of civic vigilance that aims to uncover malfeasance on the part of powerful actors. If all kinds of critical and unorthodox inquiry that challenge "official narratives" or institutionally recognized epistemic authorities are potentially liable to be dismissed as "conspiracy theory," then in the event of corruption or capture of institutions this may not only go undetected but could even be protected from detection. The concern is by no means purely hypothetical, and this paper will cite troubling evidence of such an inquiry being not only denigrated and marginalized but actively censored, with those pursuing it being vilified and even persecuted. Accordingly, a central claim here is that the public interest is not well served by general compliance with a default assumption that conspiracy theory should be understood in a pejorative sense.This is an open access article under the terms of the Creat ive Commo ns Attri bution License, which permits use, distribution and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.

show abstract

Section: Conspiracy Theory As Bona Fide Explanationmentioning

confidence: 99%

“Conspiracy theory”: The case for being critically receptive

Hayward

2021

Journal of Social Philosophy

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

From political self-deception to self-deception in political theory

Baderin

2020

Ethics & Global Politics

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Epistemic responsibility of industrial enterprise engineer

Ignatova

2020

IOP Conf. Ser.: Mater. Sci. Eng.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The concept of epistemic responsibility of an industrial enterprise engineer is introduced. The concept of an engineer’s epistemic responsibility is inspired by a situation of epistemic distrust in which the engineer finds himself as an expert. The definition of ‘epistemic’ in relation to the word ‘responsibility’ allows asking a question, what are the characteristics of the knowledge with which the engineer substantiates decision-making. For the first time in the domestic philosophy of engineering, epistemic duties of an engineer of an industrial enterprise are formulated: the duty of due diligence and epistemic zeal. The general epistemological attitude of an engineer in an extreme situation is skepticism. The author claims that the role of anomalous evidence in establishing the truth is an epistemologically difficult problem in investigating an extreme situation. In an extreme situation, the engineer’s epistemic responsibility is embodied in the following: to prevent self-deception and potentially unintentional deception of others in relation to the engineering solution; do not mislead workers who do not have the proper epistemic experience and do not allow them to be mistaken; take into account abnormal or seemingly questionable information and consider it properly.

show abstract

Three Duties of Epistemic Diligence

Cited by 3 publications

References 40 publications

“Conspiracy theory”: The case for being critically receptive

“Conspiracy theory”: The case for being critically receptive

From political self-deception to self-deception in political theory

Epistemic responsibility of industrial enterprise engineer

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About