Epistemic Benefits Research Articles

Machine Advisors: Integrating Large Language Models Into Democratic Assemblies

ABSTRACT Could the employment of large language models (LLMs) in place of human advisors improve the problem-solving ability of democratic assemblies? LLMs represent the most significant recent incarnation of artificial intelligence and could change the future of democratic governance. This paper assesses their potential to serve as expert advisors to democratic representatives. While LLMs promise enhanced expertise availability and accessibility, they also present specific challenges. These include hallucinations, misalignment and value imposition. After weighing LLMs’ benefits and drawbacks against human advisors, I argue that time-tested democratic procedures, such as deliberation and aggregation by voting, provide safeguards that are effective against human and machine advisor shortcomings alike. Additional protective measures may include custom training for advisor LLMs or boosting representatives’ competencies in query formulation. Implementation of adversarial proceedings in which LLM advisors would debate each other and provide dissenting opinions is likely to yield further epistemic benefits. Overall, promising interventions that would mitigate the LLM risks appear feasible. Machine advisors could thus empower human decision-makers to make more autonomous, higher-quality decisions. On this basis, I defend the hypothesis that LLMs’ careful integration into policymaking could augment democracy’s ability to address today’s complex social problems.

Scientific experimental articles are modernist stories

This paper attempts to revive the epistemological discussion of scientific articles. What are their epistemic aims, and how are they achieved? We argue that scientific experimental articles are best understood as a particular kind of narrative: i.e., modernist narratives (think: Woolf, Joyce), at least in the sense that they employ many of the same techniques, including colligation and the juxtaposition of multiple perspectives. We suggest that this way of writing is necessary given the nature of modern science, but it also has specific epistemic benefits: it provides readers with an effective way to grasp the content of scientific articles which increases their understanding. On the other hand, modernist writing is vulnerable to certain kinds of epistemic abuses, which can be found instantiated in modern scientific writing as well.

Getting from here to there: The contingency of historical evidence and the value of speculation

Here I look to some work in the historical sciences in order to draw out some of the epistemic benefits of “speculative narratives,” which bears on some more general epistemic benefits of speculative reasoning. Due to the contingent nature of much historical evidence, some degree of speculative reasoning is necessary to get the epistemological ball rolling in the historical sciences, and I argue that speculative narratives provide the necessary sort of frameworking apparatus for doing precisely this. I use contemporary work on the first peopling of the Americas (the “Clovis First Debate”) for illustration.

On the social epistemology of psychedelic experience

ABSTRACT Both traditional and recent accounts of the beneficial and therapeutic effects of psychedelic experiences tie these effects to specifically epistemic changes, for example the enabling of spiritual or psychological insight, or disruption of problematic beliefs or thought patterns. While these alleged benefits have sometimes been thought to be facilitated by false or even delusional beliefs , recent philosophical discussion strikes a more optimistic tone, arguing that the epistemic risks involved with psychedelic drug use tend to be relatively benign and outweighed by epistemic benefits . In this paper, we seek to nuance this picture by drawing attention to the crucial role played by social factors in determining the epistemic effects of psychedelic experiences. We argue that the very openness of mind and heightened sense of clarity and certainty that is often thought to facilitate the epistemic benefits of psychedelic drug use, also make the user more vulnerable to adverse epistemic influence from the social environment, to a degree not acknowledged in the current literature. Examining the epistemic influences of the social environment is thus important for understanding the necessary precautions of informed consent and overall safe drug use.

The epistemic value of doombehaviour: beyond the prudential consequences of doomscrolling, doomchecking, and doomsurfing

This paper analyses a novel and increasingly prevalent category of epistemic behaviour: doombehaviour, constituted by the popular phenomena of doomscrolling and doomsurfing, as well as doomchecking, which is introduced in this paper. Doombehaviour, referring to the frequent or immersive online consumption of negatively valenced news, became ubiquitous during the 2020 COVID-19 pandemic. As this behaviour has since then been found to negatively impact mood and mental health, advice has been to minimise doombehaviour or even limit news consumption altogether. Yet, as I argue, this assessment overlooks the importance of the epistemic motivation instantiating the behaviour. By presenting an analysis of doomscrolling, doomsurfing, and doomchecking within the context of our socio-technical environment, arguing for the distinct instrumental epistemic values of these categories of doombehaviour, this paper provides more nuanced advice for individuals seeking to balance the potential epistemic benefits and prudential costs of this behaviour. Epistemically motivated individuals should refrain from doomscrolling due to the risk of consuming sophisticated misinformation. However, within the parameters presented in this paper, the epistemic goods obtained through doomchecking and doomsurfing may justify the prudential costs for individuals motivated to acquire knowledge of, or be informed about, current events. This discussion opens the door to further explorations of these increasingly prevalent and potentially harmful epistemic behaviours that have, so far, been ignored by the discipline.

Learning from diversity: Public reason and the benefits of pluralism

The New Diversity Theory (NDT) represents a novel approach to public reason liberalism, providing an alternative to the traditional, Rawlsian public reason paradigm. One of the NDT's distinctive features is its emphasis on the potential advantages of a diverse society, with a particularly strong focus on the epistemic benefits of diversity. In this paper, I call into question whether societal diversity has the epistemic benefits that New Diversity theorists claim. I highlight a number of pernicious epistemic phenomena that tend to arise in diverse contexts, ultimately arguing that the only feasible way around these epistemic pitfalls is through widespread convergence on certain intellectual virtues. If these virtues are indeed necessary, then the benefits highlighted by the NDT should only be expected in societies that reflect certain kinds of diversity. More precisely, only the kinds of diversity that can still persist despite homogenization along the lines of certain intellectual virtues are compatible with the NDT's claims. Building upon this insight, I then highlight features of the NDT that require further development in order for it to serve as a compelling alternative to its Rawlsian counterpart.

Factivity, hallucination, and justification

Veridically perceiving puts us in a better epistemic position than, say, hallucinating does, at least in that veridical perception affords knowledge of our environment in a way that hallucination does not. But is there any further epistemic advantage? Some authors have recently argued that veridical perception provides a superior epistemic benefit over hallucination not just concerning knowledge, but concerning justification as well. This contrasts with a traditional view according to which experience provides justification irrespective of whether it’s veridical or hallucinatory. I think both views are mistaken. Although this traditional view should be rejected in favor of one on which some hallucinations are epistemically worse than veridical perceptions (and some are not), I don’t believe there is good reason to think that the mere fact of hallucination—or factivity more generally—has any consequences for justification. Susanna Schellenberg has endorsed both the traditional and the factive views (for different elements or kinds of perceptual justification), and I critique her views in detail, though I also draw out more general epistemological lessons about factivity and evidence.

THE ROLE OF GAMIFIED CUSTOMER BENEFITS IN PURSUING CUSTOMERS’ LOYALTY: A MEDIATED ROLE OF CUSTOEMR ENGAGEMENT

The social media platforms have become progressively vital in modern era as a means of interacting with consumers and as a means for marketers to focus on online social networks so as to foster loyalty of brands. Purpose of this study is to analyze the causal relationship among the characteristics of gamified customer benefits (epistemic benefits, social integrative benefits, personal integrative benefits and hedonic benefits), customer engagement and customer loyalty with respect to online brand communities on social media platforms. This study also analyzes the mediating role of customer engagement between gamified customer benefits and customer loyalty. Data is collected from 250 individuals and Smart PLS-4 is used to empirically test the hypothesis. Results reveals that epistemic benefits, social integrative benefits and hedonic benefits has positive & significant impact of customer engagement & customer loyalty while personal integrative benefits shows insignificant impact on customer engagement & loyalty. This study shows mediating role of customer engagement amid gamified customer benefits and customer loyalty. Thus, this study may help brand managers to better understand role of gamified customer benefits with customer engagement and customer loyalty.

“To share or not to share?” – A hybrid SEM-ANN-NCA study of the enablers and enhancers for mobile sharing economy

The proliferation of mobile technologies have facilitated the popularity of mobile sharing economy (MSE). However, extant literature that used sufficient logic has fallen short in explaining this phenomenon as the findings are insufficient to explain the necessary conditions that activate users' intention and actual usage. The purpose of this study is to identify the enablers (must-have factors) and enhancers (should-have factors) of consumers' intention and actual use of mobile sharing economy. A must-have factor is needed to initialize the effect of independent variables while a should-have factor enhances the effect. Drawing from the extended valence framework, a combined SEM-ANN-NCA analysis is used to examine users' actual adoption of MSE. The application of the “sufficiency logic” and “necessity logic” and the AI and machine learning-based ANN approach enables us to ascertain the linear-nonlinear relationships and the enablers and enhancers in mobile sharing economy. The findings show that mobile ease of use is a sufficient and necessary condition for mobile usefulness while trust is a sufficient and necessary condition for epistemic benefit. Mobile usefulness and trust are the sufficient and necessary conditions for behavioral intention while behavioral intention is the sufficient and necessary condition for actual use. Trust is a sufficient but unnecessary condition for convenience and psychological risk. Epistemic benefit and psychological risk are sufficient but not necessary conditions for behavioral intention. Education is a sufficient but not necessary condition for actual use. The study has provided important new practical and theoretical insights to MSE service providers, operators, users and scholars.

Epistemic Arguments for a Democratic Right to Silence

Abstract While much ink has been spilt over the political importance of speech, much less has been dedicated to the political importance of silence. This article seeks to fill that gap. We propose the need for a robust, democratic right to silence in public life and argue that there are politically salient epistemic reasons for recognising that right. We begin by defining what silence is and what a robust right to silence entails. We then argue that the right to silence offers two politically salient epistemic benefits. The first is that, if the right to silence is maintained, we can avoid the epistemic harm that may be caused when an individual is compelled to lie in public. The second is that the right to silence can protect marginalised individuals against the epistemic injustices that may arise when others are likely to misconstrue their speech.

Normative Demand for Deference in Political Solidarity

Allies of those experiencing injustice or oppression face a dilemma: to be neutral in the face of calls to solidarity risks siding with oppressors, yet to speak or act on behalf of others risks compounding the injustice. We argue that adhering to a normative demand for deference (NDD) to those with lived experience offers would-be allies a way of navigating this dilemma. While theorists of solidarity have generally focused on epistemic benefits of the NDD, we identify a second important and neglected good in bearing witness. However, how the NDD can be adhered to in practice also raises challenges. While the literature focuses on a gold standard model of direct engagement, we defend a valuable role for a second-order form of engagement through reading, films, and similar media. This second-order form of engagement may be particularly salient for global and transnational solidarity, an important element of contemporary global politics.

The Epistemic Benefits of Ideological Diversity

The Epistemic Benefits of Ideological Diversity

Dark Energy or Modified Gravity?

Abstract We consider some of the epistemic benefits of exploring “theory space” in the context of modifications of general relativity with intended applications in cosmology. We show how studying modifications of general relativity can help in assessing the robustness of empirical inferences, particularly in inaccessible regimes. We also discuss challenges to sharply distinguishing apparently distinct directions in theory space.

An Epistemic Version of Pascal's Wager

Abstract Epistemic consequentialism is the view that epistemic goodness is more fundamental than epistemic rightness. In this article, I examine the relationship between epistemic consequentialism and theistic belief. I argue that in an epistemic consequentialist framework, there is an epistemic reason to believe in God. Imagine having an unlimited amount of time to ask an omniscient being anything you wanted. The potential epistemic benefits would be enormous. Considerations like these point to an epistemic version of Pascal's wager. I compare and contrast the epistemic wager with the traditional wager, and argue that the epistemic wager has several notable advantages.

Cognitive Diversity or Cognitive Polarization? On Epistemic Democracy in a Post-Truth World

ABSTRACT Pessimism over a democracy’s ability to produce good outcomes is as longstanding as democracy itself. On one hand, democratic theorists consider democracy to be the only legitimate form of government on the basis that it alone promotes or safeguards intrinsic values like freedom, equality, and justice. On the other, skepticism toward the ordinary citizen’s cognitive capacities remains a perennial concern. Qualms about the epistemic value of democracy have only been made more pertinent by a fundamental problem of deep epistemic disagreement which underlies the post-truth phenomenon. I argue that the democratic theorists who have sought to defend democracy on epistemic grounds have thus far neglected such deep and intractable disagreements. Without addressing this oversight, the epistemic democrat will find that collective decision-making processes quickly become paralyzed and will not be able to yield the epistemic benefits they promise. Hence, the work for epistemic democrats is to recognize and take into account the ramifications of epistemic disagreements so as to make a stronger case for epistemic democracy.

The Epistemic Aims of Democracy

AbstractMany political philosophers have held that democracy has epistemic benefits. Most commonly, this case is made by arguing that democracies are better able to track the truth than other political arrangements. Truth, however, is not the only epistemic good that is politically valuable. A number of other epistemic goods – goods including evidence, intellectual virtue, epistemic justice, and empathetic understanding – can also have political value, and in ways that go beyond the value of truth. In this paper, I will survey those who have argued that democracy can be valuable because of these other epistemic benefits, considering (1) the ways in which these epistemic goods can be of political value and (2) the challenges that democracies face in producing them.

Curiosity and zetetic style in ADHD

ABSTRACT While research on Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder (ADHD) has traditionally focused on cognitive and behavioral deficits, there is increasing interest in exploring possible resources associated with the disorder. In this paper, we argue that the attention-patterns associated with ADHD can be understood as expressing an alternative style of inquiry, or “zetetic” style, characterized mainly by a lower barrier for becoming curious and engaging in inquiry, and a weaker disposition to regulate curiosity in response to the cognitive and practical costs associated with inquiry. Exploring this zetetic style from an epistemological perspective, we show that it is often epistemically rational and can be advantageous in important respects. We close by suggesting that the very aspects of the zetetic style that might at times render it disadvantageous from the point of view of individual subjects with ADHD, will often confer epistemic benefits to the social group that the subjects are part of.

Epistemic injustice, naturalism, and mental disorder: on the epistemic benefits of obscuring social factors

Naturalistic understandings that frame human experiences and differences as biological dysfunctions have been identified as a key source of epistemic injustice. Critics argue that those understandings are epistemically harmful because they obscure social factors that might be involved in people’s suffering; therefore, naturalistic understandings should be undermined. But those critics have overlooked the epistemic benefits such understandings can offer marginalised individuals. In this paper, I argue that the capacity of naturalistic understandings to obscure social factors does not necessarily cause epistemic injustice and can even help people to avoid some epistemic injustice. I do this by considering how some individuals with bipolar disorder deploy the neurobiological understanding of their disorder, highlighting three functions it fills for them: explanation, disclamation, and decontestation. In performing these functions, the neurobiological understanding does marginalise alternative, social perspectives on bipolar disorder. However, this can be understood as a feature rather than a bug. By marginalising alternative explanations, the neurobiological understanding can help individuals with bipolar disorder resist epistemic injustice, including, for example, the trivialisation of their experiences. Given this, critics seeking to undermine naturalistic understandings of mental disorder and other experiences in the pursuit of epistemic justice themselves risk exacerbating epistemic injustice.

The division of cognitive labor and the structure of interdisciplinary problems

Interdisciplinarity is strongly promoted in science policy across the world. It is seen as a necessary condition for providing practical solutions to many pressing complex problems for which no single disciplinary approach is adequate alone. In this article we model multi- and interdisciplinary research as an instance of collective problem solving. Our goal is to provide a basic representation of this type of problem solving and chart the epistemic benefits and costs of researchers engaging in different forms of cognitive coordination. Our findings suggest that typical forms of interdisciplinary collaboration are unlikely to find optimal solutions to complex problems within short time frames and can lead to methodological conservatism. This provides some grounds for both reflecting on current science policy and envisioning more effective scientific practices with respect to interdisciplinary problem solving.

Examining Generation Z Consumer Online Fashion Resale Participation and Continuance Intention through the Lens of Consumer Perceived Value

The fashion industry has recently embraced a circular economy due to the increased consumer awareness of environmental issues, especially among younger generations. However, it is unclear if younger consumers, especially Generation Z, are willing to consistently engage in sustainable consumption patterns, such as buying and selling pre-owned fashion products through online resale platforms. This research specifically focuses on Generation Z consumers’ online fashion resale participation continuance. A research model was proposed with perceived benefits, pro-environmental beliefs as antecedents to attitude and continuance intention, and consumer perceived value as a moderating factor shaping the specified direct and mediating relationship. An online survey was administered to a convenience sample of 257 Generation Z consumers, and exploratory factor analysis identified five dimensions of perceived benefits of online fashion resale participation, epistemic benefits, product choice benefits, quality benefits, value for money, and budget benefits. Two groups of consumers were identified based on value perceptions of clothing consumption: maximum value pursuers and self-oriented shoppers. Structural equation modeling was employed to test the hypothesis. Results showed that pro-environmental beliefs affect Generation Z consumers’ attitudes and continuance intention to online fashion resale participation with strong effects for the group of self-oriented shoppers. Among the five dimensions of perceived benefits, only epistemic benefits affect continuance intention for self-oriented consumers. Theoretical and practical implications are provided in this paper.