References
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 25 June 2021
Summary
A summary is not available for this content so a preview has been provided. Please use the Get access link above for information on how to access this content.
- Type
- Chapter
- Information
- Beings of Thought and ActionEpistemic and Practical Rationality, pp. 220 - 228Publisher: Cambridge University PressPrint publication year: 2021
References
Ahmed, Arif, and Salow, Bernhard (2019). “Don’t Look Now,” British Journal for the Philosophy of Science, Vol. 70, No. 2, 327–50.Google Scholar
Alspector-Kelly, Marc (2019). Against Knowledge Closure (Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Anderson, Charity (2015). “On the Intimate Relationship of Knowledge and Action,” Episteme, Vol. 12, No. 3, 343–53.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Anderson, Charity, and Hawthorne, John (2019a). “Knowledge, Practical Adequacy, and Stakes,” Oxford Studies in Epistemology, Vol. 6, 234–57.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Anderson, Charity, and Hawthorne, John (2019b). “Pragmatic Encroachment and Closure,” in Kim, Brian and McGrath, Matthew (eds.), Pragmatic Encroachment in Epistemology (New York: Routledge), 107–15.Google Scholar
Audi, Robert (2001). “An Internalist Theory of Normative Grounds,” Philosophical Topics, Vol. 29, 19–46.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Audi, Robert (2004). “Theoretical Rationality: Its Sources, Structure, and Scope,” in Mele, Alfred and Rawling, Piers (eds.), The Oxford Handbook of Rationality (Oxford: Oxford University Press), 17–44.Google Scholar
Baril, Anne (2019). “Pragmatic Encroachment and Practical Reasons,” in Kim, Brian and McGrath, Matthew (eds.), Pragmatic Encroachment in Epistemology (New York: Routledge), 56–68.Google Scholar
Basu, Rima (2019). “What We Owe to Each Other Epistemically,” Philosophical Studies, Vol. 176, No. 4, 915–31.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Basu, Rima, and Schroeder, Mark (2019). “Doxastic Wronging,” in Kim, Brian and McGrath, Matthew (eds.), Pragmatic Encroachment in Epistemology (New York: Routledge), 181–205.Google Scholar
Beddor, Bob (2020). “Certainty in Action,” Philosophical Quarterly, Vol. 70, No. 281, 711–37.Google Scholar
Beebe, James (2012). “Social Functions of Knowledge Attributions,” in Brown, Jessica and Gerken, Mikkel (eds.), Knowledge Ascriptions (Oxford: Oxford University Press), 220–42.Google Scholar
Benton, Matthew (2018). “Knowledge, Hope, and Fallibilism,” Synthese [online version]. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11229-018-1794-8.Google Scholar
Berker, Selim (2008). “Luminosity Regained,” Philosopher’s Imprint, Vol. 8, No. 2, 1–22.Google Scholar
Blome-Tillmann, Michael (2009). “Contextualism, Subject-Sensitive Invariantism, and the Interaction of ‘Knowledge’-Ascriptions with Modal and Temporal Operators,” Philosophy and Phenomenological Research, Vol. 79, No. 2, 315–31.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bobier, Christopher (2017). “Hope and Practical Deliberation,” Analysis, Vol. 77. No. 3, 495–97.Google Scholar
Bolinger, Renée (2018). “The Rational Impermissibility of Accepting (Some) Racial Generalizations,” Synthese, Vol. 197, 2415–31.Google Scholar
Bovens, Luc (1999). “The Value of Hope,” Philosophy and Phenomenological Research, Vol. 59, No. 3, 667–81.Google Scholar
Boyd, Kenneth (2015). “Assertion, practical reasoning, and epistemic separabilism,” Philosophical Studies, Vol. 172, No. 7, 1907–27.Google Scholar
Bratman, Michael (1992). “Practical Reasoning and Acceptance in a Context,” Mind, Vol. 101, No. 401, 1–16.Google Scholar
Brown, Jessica (2006). “Contextualism and Warranted Assertability Manoeuvres,” Philosophical Studies, Vol. 130, No. 3, 407–35.Google Scholar
Brown, Jessica (2008). “Subject-Sensitive Invariantism and the Knowledge Norm for Practical Reasoning,” Nous, Vol. 42, No. 2, 167–89.Google Scholar
Brown, Jessica (2012). “Practical Reasoning, Decision Theory, and Anti-Intellectualism,” Episteme, Vol. 9, No. 1, 43–62.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Brown, Jessica (2014a). “Shifty Talk: Knowledge and Causation,” Philosophical Studies, Vol. 167, No. 2, 183–99.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Brown, Jessica (2014b). “Impurism, Practical Reasoning, and the Threshold Problem,” Nous, Vol. 47, No. 1, 179–92.Google Scholar
Brown, Jessica (2016). “Contextualism about Evidential Support,” Philosophy and Phenomenological Research, Vol. 92, No. 2, 329–54.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Brown, Jessica (2018). Fallibilism: Evidence and Knowledge (Oxford: Oxford University Press).Google Scholar
Brueckner, Anthony (2005). “Contextualism, Hawthorne’s Invariantism and Third Person Cases,” Philosophical Quarterly, Vol. 55, No. 219, 315–18.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Buchak, Lara (2012). “Can It Be Rational to Have Faith?,” in Chandler, Jake and Harrison, Victoria S. (eds.), Probability in the Philosophy of Religion (Oxford: Oxford University Press), 225–48.Google Scholar
Buckwalter, Wesley (2010). “Knowledge Isn’t Closed on Saturdays,” Review of Philosophy and Psychology, Vol. 1, No. 3, 395–406.Google Scholar
Buckwalter, Wesley, and Schaffer, Jonathan (2015). “Knowledge, Stakes, Mistakes,” Nous, Vol. 49, No. 2, 201–34.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Burge, Tyler (2003). “Perceptual Entitlement,” Philosophy and Phenomenological Research, Vol. 67, No. 3, 503–48.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Chignell, Andrew (2013). “Rational Hope, Moral Order, and the Revolution of the Will,” in Watkins, Eric (ed.), Divine Order, Human Order, and the Order of Nature (Oxford: Oxford University Press), 197–218.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Clarke, Roger (2013). “Belief Is Credence One (in Context),” Philosopher’s Imprint, Vol. 13, No. 11, 1–18.Google Scholar
Cohen, Stewart (1999). “Contextualism, Skepticism, and the Structure of Reasons,” Philosophical Perspectives, Vol. 13, 57–89.Google Scholar
Cohen, Stewart (2012). “Does Practical Rationality Constrain Epistemic Rationality?,” Philosophy and Phenomenological Research, Vol. 85, No. 2, 447–55.Google Scholar
Comesaña, Juan (2013). “Epistemic Pragmatism: An Argument against Moderation,” Res Philosophica, Vol. 90, No. 2, 237–60.Google Scholar
Craig, Edward (1990). Knowledge and the State of Nature (Oxford: Oxford University Press).Google Scholar
Das, Nilanjan (2020). “The Value of Biased Information,” The British Journal for the Philosophy of Science [online version]. https://doi.org/10.1093/bjps/axaa003.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Davies, Wayne (2007). “Knowledge Claims and Context: Loose Use,” Philosophical Studies, Vol. 132, No. 3, 395–438.Google Scholar
DeRose, Keith (1991). “Epistemic Possibilities,” The Philosophical Review, Vol. 100, No. 4, 581–605.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
DeRose, Keith (1992). “Contextualism and Knowledge Attributions,” Philosophy and Phenomenological Research, Vol. 52, No. 4, 913–29.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dogramaci, Sinan (2012). “Reverse Engineering Epistemic Evaluations,” Philosophy and Phenomenological Research, Vol. 84, No. 3, 513–30.Google Scholar
Dogramaci, Sinan (2015). “Communist Conventions for Deductive Reasoning,” Nous, Vol. 49, No. 4, 776–99.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dougherty, Trent, and Rysiew, Patrick (2009). “Fallibilism, Epistemic Possibility, and Concessive Knowledge Attributions,” Philosophy and Phenomenological Research, Vol. 78, No. 1, 123–32.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dretske, Fred (1970). “Epistemic Operators,” Journal of Philosophy, Vol. 67, No. 24, 1007–23.Google Scholar
Eaton, Daniel, and Pickavance, Timothy (2015). “Evidence against Pragmatic Encroachment,” Philosophical Studies, Vol. 172, No. 12, 3135–43.Google Scholar
Egan, Andy, and Weatherson, Brian (2011). Epistemic Modality (Oxford: Oxford University Press).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fantl, Jeremy, and McGrath, Matthew (2002). “Evidence, Pragmatics, and Justification,” The Philosophical Review, Vol. 111, No. 1, 67–94.Google Scholar
Fantl, Jeremy, and McGrath, Matthew (2007). “On Pragmatic Encroachment in Epistemology,” Philosophy and Phenomenological Research, Vol. 75, No.3, 558–89.Google Scholar
Fantl, Jermey, and McGrath, Matthew (2009). Knowledge in an Uncertain World (Oxford: Oxford University Press).Google Scholar
Fantl, Jeremy, and McGrath, Matthew (2012a). “Arguing for Shifty Epistemology,” in Brown, Jessica and Gerken, Mikkel (eds.), Knowledge Ascriptions (Oxford: Oxford University Press), 55–74.Google Scholar
Fantl, Jermey, and McGrath, Matthew (2012b). “Replies to Cohen, Neta, and Reed,” Philosophy and Phenomenological Research, Vol. 85, No. 2, 473–90.Google Scholar
Fassio, Davide (2017). “Is There an Epistemic Norm for Practical Reasoning?,” Philosophical Studies, Vol. 174, No. 9, 2137–66.Google Scholar
Feltz, Adam, and Zarpentine, Chris (2010). “Do You Know More When It Matters Less?,” Philosophical Psychology, Vol. 23, No. 5, 683–706.Google Scholar
Fine, Kit (2001). “The Question of Realism,” Philosopher’s Imprint, Vol. 1, No. 1, 1–30.Google Scholar
Fricker, Miranda (2007). Epistemic Injustice: Power and the Ethics of Knowing (Oxford: Oxford University Press).Google Scholar
Friedman, Jane (2013). “Rational Agnosticism and Degrees of Belief,” Oxford Studies in Epistemology, Vol. 4, 57–81.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fritz, James (2017). “Pragmatic Encroachment and Moral Encroachment,” Pacific Philosophical Quarterly, Vol. 98, No. S1, 643–61.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ganson, Dorit (2008). “Evidentialism and Pragmatic Constraints on Outright Belief,” Philosophical Studies, Vol. 139, No. 3, 441–58.Google Scholar
Gao, Jie (2019). “Credal Pragmatism,” Philosophical Studies, Vol. 176, No. 6, 1595–1617.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gerken, Mikkel (2012a). “Discursive Justification and Skepticism,” Synthese, Vol. 189, No. 2, 373–94.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gerken, Mikkel (2012b). “On the Cognitive Bases for Knowledge Ascriptions,” in Brown, Jessica and Gerken, Mikkel (eds.), Knowledge Ascriptions (Oxford: Oxford University Press), 140–70.Google Scholar
Gerken, Mikkel (2013). “Epistemic Focal Bias,” Australasian Journal of Philosophy, Vol. 91, No. 1, 41–61.Google Scholar
Gerken, Mikkel (2015). “The Roles of Knowledge Ascriptions in Epistemic Assessment,” European Journal of Philosophy, Vol. 23, No. 1, 141–61.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gerken, Mikkel (2019a). “Pragmatic Encroachment and the Challenge from Epistemic Injustice,” Philosopher’s Imprint, Vol. 19, No. 15, 1–19.Google Scholar
Gerken, Mikkel (2019b). “Pragmatic Encroachment on Scientific Knowledge?,” in Kim, Brian and McGrath, Matthew (eds.), Pragmatic Encroachment in Epistemology (New York: Routledge), 116–40.Google Scholar
Good, Irving John (1967). “On the Principle of Total Evidence,” British Journal for the Philosophy of Science, Vol. 17, No. 4, 319–21.Google Scholar
Greco, Daniel (2013). “Probability and Prodigality,” Oxford Studies in Epistemology, Vol. 4, 82–107.Google Scholar
Greco, Daniel (2015). “How I Learned to Stop Worrying and Love Probability 1,” Philosophical Perspectives, Vol. 29, 179–201.Google Scholar
Greco, Daniel, and Hedden, Brian (2016). “Uniqueness and Metaepistemology,” Journal of Philosophy, Vol. 113, No. 8, 365–95.Google Scholar
Grimm, Stephen (2011). “On Intellectualism in Epistemology,” Mind, Vol. 120, No. 479, 705–33.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Grimm, Stephen (2015). “Knowledge, Practical Interests, and Rising Tides,” in Henderson, David K. and Greco, John (eds.), Epistemic Evaluation (Oxford: Oxford University Press), 117–37.Google Scholar
Hamblin, C. L. (1958). “Questions,” Australasian Journal of Philosophy, Vol. 36, No. 3, 159–68.Google Scholar
Hannon, Michael (2013). “The Practical Origins of Epistemic Contextualism,” Erkenntnis, Vol. 78, No. 4, 899–919.Google Scholar
Hannon, Michael (2017). “A Solution to Knowledge’s Threshold Problem,” Philosophical Studies, Vol. 174, No. 3, 607–29.Google Scholar
Harman, Gilbert (1999). Reasoning, Meaning, and Mind (Oxford: Oxford University Press).Google Scholar
Harris, Adam, Corner, Adam, and Hahn, Ulrike (2009). “Estimating the Probability of Negative Events,” Cognition, Vol. 110, No. 1, 51–64.Google Scholar
Harsanyi, John (1985). “Acceptance of Empirical Statements: A Bayesian Theory without Cognitive Utilities,” Theory and Decision, Vol. 18, No. 1, 1–30.Google Scholar
Hawthorne, John, and Stanley, Jason (2008). “Knowledge and Action,” Journal of Philosophy, Vol. 105, No. 10, 571–90.Google Scholar
Hieronymi, Pamela (2005). “The Wrong Kind of Reason,” Journal of Philosophy, Vol. 102, No. 9, 437–57.Google Scholar
Holton, Richard (1997). “Some Telling Examples: A reply to Tsohatzidis,” Journal of Pragmatics, Vol. 28, No. 5, 625–28.Google Scholar
Holton, Richard (2008). “Partial Belief, Partial Intention,” Mind, Vol. 117, No. 465, 27–58.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Holton, Richard (2014). “Intention As a Model for Belief,” in Vargas, Manuel and Yaffe, Gideon (eds.), Rational and Social Agency: The Philosophy of Michael Bratman (Oxford: Oxford University Press), 12–37.Google Scholar
Howell, Robert (2005). “A Puzzle for Pragmatism,” American Philosophical Quarterly, Vol. 42, No. 2, 131–36.Google Scholar
Ichikawa, Jonathan Jenkins (2012). “Knowledge Norms and Acting Well,” Thought, Vol. 1, No. 1, 49–55.Google Scholar
Ichikawa, Jonathan Jenkin, Jarvis, Benjamin, and Rubin, Katherine (2012). “Pragmatic Encroachment and Belief-Desire Psychology,” Analytic Philosophy, Vol. 53, No. 4, 327–43.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Jackson, Alexander (2012). “Two Ways to Put Knowledge First,” Australasian Journal of Philosophy, Vol. 90, No. 2, 353–69.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Jackson, Elizabeth (2019). “How Belief-Credence Dualism Explains Away Pragmatic Encroachment,” The Philosophical Quarterly, Vol. 69, No. 276, 511–33.Google Scholar
James, William (1897). The Will to Believe, and Other Essays in Popular Philosophy (New York: Longmans, Green, and Co.).Google Scholar
Kelly, Thomas (2014). “Evidence,” Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy (Winter 2016 Edition), Edward N. Zalta (ed.). https://plato.stanford.edu/archives/win2016/entries/evidence.Google Scholar
Knobe, Joshua, and Schaffer, Jonathan (2012). “Contrastive Knowledge Surveyed,” Nous, Vol. 46, No. 4, 675–708.Google Scholar
Kolodny, Niko, and Brunero, John (2018). “Instrumental Rationality,” Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy (Summer 2015 Edition), Edward N. Zalta (ed.). http://plato.stanford.edu/archives/sum2015/entries/rationality-instrumental/.Google Scholar
Kruglanski, Arie, and Mayseless, Ofra (1987). “Motivational Effects in the Social Comparison of Opinions,” Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, Vol. 53, No. 5, 834–42.Google Scholar
Lackey, Jennifer (2010). “Acting on Knowledge,” Philosophical Perspectives, Vol. 24, 361–82.Google Scholar
Lackey, Jennifer (2016). “Assertion and Expertise,” Philosophy and Phenomenological Research, Vol. 89, No. 1, 509–17.Google Scholar
Lawlor, Krista (2020). “Knowledge and Reasonableness,” Synthese [online version]. chttps://doi.org/10.1007/s11229-020-02803-z.Google Scholar
Levy, Neil (2016). “Have I Turned the Stove Off? Explaining Everyday Anxiety,” Philosopher’s Imprint, Vol. 16, No. 2, 1–10.Google Scholar
Littlejohn, Clayton (2009). “Must We Act Only on What We Know?,” Journal of Philosophy, Vol. 106, No. 8, 463–73.Google Scholar
Littlejohn, Clayton (2012). Justification and the Truth-Connection (Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press).Google Scholar
Littlejohn, Clayton (2014). “The Unity of Reason,” in Littlejohn, Clayton and Turri, John (eds.), Epistemic Norms: New Essays on Belief, Action, and Assertion (Oxford: Oxford University Press), 135–54.Google Scholar
Locke, Dustin (2014). “Knowledge Norms and Assessing Them Well,” Thought, Vol. 3, No. 1, 80–89.Google Scholar
Locke, Dustin (2015). “Practical Certainty,” Philosophy and Phenomenological Research, Vol. 90, No. 1, 72–95.Google Scholar
Locke, Dustin (2017). “Implicature and Non-Local Pragmatic Encroachment,” Synthese, Vol. 194, No. 2, 631–54.Google Scholar
Lutz, Matt (2013). “The Pragmatics of Pragmatic Encroachment,” Synthese, Vol. 191, No. 8, 1717–40.Google Scholar
MacFarlane, John (2005). “Knowledge Laundering: Testimony and Sensitive Invariantism,” Analysis, Vol. 62, No. 2, 132–38.Google Scholar
Martin, Adrienne (2011). “Hopes and Dreams,” Philosophy and Phenomenological Research, Vol. 83, No. 1, 148–73.Google Scholar
Martin, Adrienne (2014). How We Hope: A Moral Psychology (Princeton: Princeton University Press).Google Scholar
May, Joshua, Sinnott-Armstrong, Walter, Hull, Jay G. , and Zimmerman, Aaron (2010). “Practical Interests, Relevant Alternatives, and Knowledge Attributions: An Empirical Study,” Review of Philosophy and Psychology, Vol. 1, No2, 265–73.Google Scholar
McCormick, Miriam Schleifer (2017). “Rational Hope,” Philosophical Explorations, Vol. 20, No. 1, 127–41.Google Scholar
McGrath, Matthew (2017). “Pragmatic Encroachment – Its Problems Are Your Problems!,” in McHugh, Conor, Way, Jonathan, and Whiting, Daniel (eds.), Normativity: Epistemic and Practical (Oxford: Oxford University Press), 162–78.Google Scholar
McGrath, Matthew (2018). “Defeating Pragmatic Encroachment,” Synthese, Vol. 195, No. 7, 3051–64.Google Scholar
McKenna, Robin (2013). “Epistemic Contextualism: A Normative Approach,” Pacific Philosophical Quarterly, Vol. 94, No. 1, 101–23.Google Scholar
Miller, Boaz (2014). “Science, Values, and Pragmatic Encroachment on Knowledge,” European Journal of Philosophy of Science, Vol. 4, No. 2, 253–70.Google Scholar
Moss, Sarah (2018). “Moral Encroachment,” Proceedings of the Aristotelian Society, Vol. 118, No. 2, 177–205.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mueller, Andy (2017a). “How Does Epistemic Rationality Constrain Practical Rationality?,” Analytic Philosophy, Vol. 58, No. 2, 139–55.Google Scholar
Mueller, Andy (2017b). “Pragmatic or Pascalian Encroachment? A Problem for Schroeder’s Explanation of Pragmatic Encroachment,” Logos & Episteme, Vol. 8, No. 2, 235–41.Google Scholar
Mueller, Andy (2019). “Hopeless Practical Deliberation – Reply to Bobier,” Analysis, Vol. 79, No. 4, 629–63.Google Scholar
Mueller, Andy (2021). “The Knowledge Norm of Apt Practical Reasoning,” Synthese [online version]. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11229-021-03030-w.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mueller, Andy, and Ross, Jacob (2017). “Knowledge Dethroned,” Analytic Philosophy, Vol. 58, No. 4, 283–96.Google Scholar
Nagel, Jennifer (2008). “Knowledge Ascriptions and the Psychological Consequences of Changing Stakes,” Australasian Journal of Philosophy, Vol. 86, No. 2, 279–94.Google Scholar
Nagel, Jennifer (2010). “Knowledge Ascriptions and the Psychological Consequences of Thinking about Error,” The Philosophical Quarterly, Vol. 60, No. 239, 286–306.Google Scholar
Neta, Ram (2003). “Contextualism and the Problem of the External World,” Philosophy and Phenomenological Research, Vol. 66, No. 1, 1–31.Google Scholar
Neta, Ram (2009). “Treating Something As a Reason for Action,” Nous, Vol. 43, No. 4, 684–99.Google Scholar
Neta, Ram (2012). “The Case against Purity,” Philosophy and Phenomenological Research, Vol. 85, No. 2, 456–64.Google Scholar
Norby, Aaron (2015). “Uncertainty without All the Doubt,” Mind & Language, Vol. 30, No. 1, 70–94.Google Scholar
Pace, Michael (2011). “The Epistemic Value of Moral Considerations: Justification, Moral Encroachment, and James’ ‘Will to Believe’,” Nous, Vol. 45, No. 2, 239–68.Google Scholar
Pinillos, N. Angel (2012). “Knowledge, Experiments, and Practical Interests,” in Brown, Jessica and Gerken, Mikkel (eds.), Knowledge Ascriptions (Oxford: Oxford University Press), 192–219.Google Scholar
Raz, Joseph (2011). From Normativity to Responsibility (Oxford: Oxford University Press).Google Scholar
Reed, Baron (2012). “Resisting Encroachment,” Philosophy and Phenomenological Research, Vol. 85, No. 2, 465–72.Google Scholar
Reed, Baron (2013). “Fallibilism, Epistemic Possibility, and Epistemic Agency,” Philosophical Issues, Vol. 23, 40–69.Google Scholar
Roeber, Blake (2014). “Minimalism and the Limits of Warranted Assertability Maneuvers,” Episteme, Vol. 11, No. 3, 245–60.Google Scholar
Roeber, Blake (2018). “The Pragmatic Encroachment Debate,” Nous, Vol. 52, No. 1, 171–95.Google Scholar
Roeber, Blake (2020). “How to argue for pragmatic encroachment,” Synthese, Vol. 197, 2649–64.Google Scholar
Ross, Jacob, and Schroeder, Mark (2014). “Belief, Credence, and Pragmatic Encroachment,” Philosophy and Phenomenological Research, Vol. 88, No. 2, 259–88.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rubin, Katherine (2015). “Total Pragmatic Encroachment and Epistemic Permissiveness,” Pacific Philosophical Quarterly, Vol. 96, No. 1, 12–38.Google Scholar
Russell, Gillian, and Doris, John (2008). “Knowledge by Indifference,” Australasian Journal of Philosophy, Vol. 86, No. 3, 429–37.Google Scholar
Rysiew, Patrick (2001). “The Context-Sensitivity of Knowledge Attributions,” Nous, Vol. 35, No. 4, 477–514.Google Scholar
Schaffer, Jonathan (2006). “The Irrelevance of the Subject: Against Subject-Sensitive Invariantism,” Philosophical Studies, Vol. 127, No. 1, 87–107.Google Scholar
Schroeder, Mark (2012). “Stakes, withholding and pragmatic encroachment on knowledge,” Philosophical Studies, Vol. 160, No. 2, 265–85.Google Scholar
Schroeder, Mark (2017). “The Epistemic Consequences of Forced Choice,” Logos & Episteme, Vol. 8, No. 3, 365–74.Google Scholar
Schroeder, Mark (2018). “Rational Stability under Pragmatic Encroachment,” Episteme, Vol. 15, No. 3, 297–312.Google Scholar
Sharon, Assaf, and Spectre, Levi (2017). “Evidence and the Openness of Knowledge,” Philosophical Studies, Vol. 174, No. 4, 1001–37.Google Scholar
Shin, Joseph (2014). “Time Constraints and Pragmatic Encroachment on Knowledge,” Episteme, Vol. 11, No. 2, 157–80.Google Scholar
Simion, Mona (2018). “No Epistemic Norm for Action,” American Philosophical Quarterly, Vol. 55, No. 3, 231–38.Google Scholar
Slovic, Paul, Fischoff, B., and Lichtenstein, Sarah (1982). “Facts vs Fears,” in Kahneman, Daniel, Slovic, Paul, and Tversk, Amos y (eds.), Judgment under Uncertainty: Heuristics and Biases (Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press), 463–89.Google Scholar
Smithies, Declan (2012). “The Normative Role of Knowledge,” Nous, Vol. 46, No. 2, 265–88.Google Scholar
Snedegar, Justin (2013). “Reason Claims and Contrastivism about Reasons,” Philosophical Studies, Vol. 166, No. 2, 231–42.Google Scholar
Sripada, Chandra, and Stanley, Jason (2012). “Empirical Tests of Interest-Relative Invariantism,” Episteme, Vol. 9, No. 1, 3–26.Google Scholar
Staffel, Julia (2019). “How Do Beliefs Simplify Reasoning?,” Nous, Vol. 53, No. 4, 937–62.Google Scholar
Stanley, Jason (2005). Knowledge and Practical Interests (Oxford: Oxford University Press).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Tang, Weng Hong (2015). “Belief and cognitive limitations,” Philosophical Studies, Vol. 172, No. 1, 249–60.Google Scholar
Way, Jonathan, and Whiting, Daniel (2016). “If You Justifiably Believe That You Ought to Φ, Then You Ought to Φ,” Philosophical Studies, Vol. 173, No. 7, 1873–95.Google Scholar
Weatherson, Brian (2005). “Can We Do without Pragmatic Encroachment?,” Philosophical Perspectives, Vol. 19, 417–43.Google Scholar
Weatherson, Brian (2011). “Defending Interest-Relative Invariantism,” Logos & Episteme, Vol. 2, No. 4, 591–609.Google Scholar
Weatherson, Brian (2012). “Knowledge, Bets, and Interests,” in Brown, Jessica and Gerken, Mikkel (eds.), Knowledge Ascriptions (Oxford: Oxford University Press), 75–103.Google Scholar
Wedgwood, Ralph (2008). “Contextualism about Justified Belief,” Philosopher’s Imprint, Vol. 8, No. 9, 1–20.Google Scholar
Weisberg, Jonathan (2013). “Knowledge in Action,” Philosopher’s Imprint, Vol. 13, No. 22, 1–23.Google Scholar
Whiting, Daniel (2014a). “Keep Things in Perspective: Reasons, Rationality and the A Priori,” Journal of Ethics & Social Philosophy, Vol. 8, No. 1, 1–22.Google Scholar
Whiting, Daniel (2014b). “Reasons for Belief, Reasons for Action, the Aim of Belief, and the Aim of Action,” in Littlejohn, Clayton and Turri, John (eds.), Epistemic Norms (Oxford: Oxford University Press), 219–38.Google Scholar
Williamson, Timothy (2000). Knowledge and Its Limits (Oxford: Oxford University Press).Google Scholar
Williamson, Timothy (2005). “Contextualism, Subject-Sensitive Invariantism and Knowledge of Knowledge,” The Philosophical Quarterly, Vol. 55, No. 219, 213–35.Google Scholar
Williamson, Timothy (2014). “Very Improbable Knowing,” Erkenntnis, Vol. 79, No. 5, 971–99.Google Scholar
Worsnip, Alex (2015a). “Two Kinds of Stakes,” Pacific Philosophical Quarterly, Vol. 96, No. 3, 307–24.Google Scholar
Worsnip, Alex (2015b). “Possibly False Knowledge,” Journal of Philosophy, Vol. 115, No. 2, 225–46.Google Scholar
Worsnip, Alex (2020). “Can Pragmatists Be Moderate?,” Philosophy and Phenomenological Research [online version]. https://doi.org/10.1111/phpr.12673.Google Scholar