Abstract

Abstract The aim of this paper is to vindicate the Cartesian quest for certainty by arguing that to aim at certainty is a constitutive feature of cognition. My argument hinges on three observations concerning the nature of doubt and judgment: first, it is always possible to have a doubt as to whether p in so far as one takes the truth of p to be uncertain; second, in so far as one takes the truth of p to be certain, one is no longer able to genuinely wonder whether p is true; third, to ask the question whether p is to desire to receive a true answer. On this ground I clarify in what sense certainty is the aim of cognition. I then argue that in judging that p we commit ourselves to p’s being certain and that certainty is the constitutive norm of judgment. The paper as a whole provides a picture of the interplay between doubt and judgment that aims at vindicating the traditional insight that our ability to doubt testifies our aspiration to know with absolute certainty.

Highlights

  • The notion of absolute certainty has been almost completely removed from the agenda of contemporary epistemologists

  • I reply by considering several ways in which our doubts might be irrational and by arguing that these cases are compatible with the claim that certainty plays a threefold constitutive normative role for cognition: certainty is the aim of questioning, it is the commitment of judgement, and it is the norm of judgment

  • The claims defended so far are grounded on phenomenological considerations: we observe the dynamics of conscious cognition by being conscious cognizers and we observe that (i) we can doubt whether p is true if we take the truth of p to be uncertain; (ii) we can’t seriously doubt whether p is true if we take the truth of p to be certain; (iii) in asking whether p is true we want to know whether p is true; (iv) we can’t seriously doubt whether p is true if we are judging that p

Read more

Summary

Introduction

The notion of absolute certainty has been almost completely removed from the agenda of contemporary epistemologists. I wish to counter this tendency by arguing that the desire to possess certain knowledge is a constitutive feature of our inquiring mind. It is not some sort of psychological or philosophical compulsion that can be extirpated through proper philosophical analysis. I reply by considering several ways in which our doubts might be irrational and by arguing that these cases are compatible with the claim that certainty plays a threefold constitutive normative role for cognition: certainty is the aim of questioning, it is the commitment of judgement, and it is the norm of judgment. The paper as a whole provides a picture of the interplay between doubt and judgment that aims at vindicating the traditional insight that our ability to doubt testifies our aspiration to know with absolute certainty

Questioning
Resolving a Question by Answering It
Resolving a Question without Answering It
Questioning Aims at Truth
Phenomenology and Linguistic Evidence
Questioning Aims at Certainty
To Judge that p is to be Committed to p’s Being Certain
Certainty as the Constitutive Norm of Judgment
10 Irrational Doubts?
11 Conclusions
Full Text
Paper version not known

Talk to us

Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have

Schedule a call

Disclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.