Accelerate Literature Icon
Want to do a literature review? Try our new Literature Review workflow

Against Evidential Preemption

  • TL;DR
  • Abstract
  • Literature Map
  • Similar Papers
TL;DR

This paper challenges Begby's claim that evidential preemption—preemptively undermining future counter-testimony—can influence how subjects interpret future evidence, arguing instead that it lacks epistemic force. The author distinguishes their critique from Kelly’s and uses it to undermine Begby’s responses to Kelly’s criticisms.

Abstract
Translate article icon Translate Article Star icon

Abstract Endre Begby [2021a, 2021b] identifies a phenomenon he refers to as evidential preemption whereby a testifier seeks to preemptively undermine future counter-testimony by noting extant disagreements while simultaneously asserting the claim under dispute. Such preemption is typified by claims of the form: “my opponents will tell you that q ; but I say p ” (Begby [2021b: 99]). Begby makes a plausible case that this strategy is often employed in ordinary and public discourse. Begby argues further that evidential preemption can often succeed in altering how a subject who has encountered such a preemptive statement ought to treat the future predicted counterevidence when they encounter it. Begby provides both intuitive and Bayesian arguments in favor of this position. I argue that, contra Begby, evidential preemption does not have epistemic force. I then distinguish my arguments from those presented by Kelly [2024] and show how my diagnosis of the failure of evidential preemption can be used to undermine the arguments Begby [2024] makes in response to Kelly’s criticisms.

Similar Papers
  • Research Article
  • Cite Count Icon 31
  • 10.1080/1523908x.2019.1661232
Deliberation and ecological democracy: from citizen to global system
  • Sep 5, 2019
  • Journal of Environmental Policy & Planning
  • Simon Niemeyer

ABSTRACTEcological democracy confronts a challenge of not only reconciling democracy and ecology, but doing so where human activities and their environmental consequences are increasingly global. Deliberative scholars dealing with these issues emphasise reflexive governance, involving the contestation of discourses, as part of the solution, mostly aimed at high-level institutions and intergovernmental cooperation. However, even at this level democracy demands responsiveness to the citizen. To this end, the paper explores citizen-level deliberation to inform possibilities for ecological democracy writ large, via a growing literature on deliberative governance and polycentrism. Different system levels are connected via ecologically reflexive capacity and the discursive conditions under which it is enhanced, including in small-scale minipublics. This understanding informs mechanisms for ‘scaling up’ deliberative quality to the wider public sphere via regulating the manipulation of public discourse. Minipublic deliberation, properly harnessed, can serve to decontaminate public debate of anti-reflexive strategic arguments and reshape public discourse. Such anti-reflexive strategies seek to shape the public will, specifically by de-emphasising ecology via intuitive arguments that short-cut public reasoning. Acting as discursive regulatory trustees, minipublics can improve reflexivity in the wider system via a nested polycentric approach that discursively connects citizens’ deliberation to the global system both horizontally and vertically.

  • Research Article
  • Cite Count Icon 159
  • 10.1021/es500191g
Energy and climate impacts of producing synthetic hydrocarbon fuels from CO(2).
  • May 30, 2014
  • Environmental Science & Technology
  • Coen Van Der Giesen + 2 more

Within the context of carbon dioxide (CO2) utilization there is an increasing interest in using CO2 as a resource to produce sustainable liquid hydrocarbon fuels. When these fuels are produced by solely using solar energy they are labeled as solar fuels. In the recent discourse on solar fuels intuitive arguments are used to support the prospects of these fuels. This paper takes a quantitative approach to investigate some of the claims made in this discussion. We analyze the life cycle performance of various classes of solar fuel processes using different primary energy and CO2 sources. We compare their efficacy with respect to carbon mitigation with ubiquitous fossil-based fuels and conclude that producing liquid hydrocarbon fuels starting from CO2 by using existing technologies requires much more energy than existing fuels. An improvement in life cycle CO2 emissions is only found when solar energy and atmospheric CO2 are used. Producing fuels from CO2 is a very long-term niche at best, not the panacea suggested in the recent public discourse.

Save Icon
Up Arrow
Open/Close
Notes

Save Important notes in documents

Highlight text to save as a note, or write notes directly

You can also access these Documents in Paperpal, our AI writing tool

Powered by our AI Writing Assistant