Skip to main content

BELIEF AND PRETENSE: A REPLY TO GENDLER

Buy Article:

$51.00 plus tax (Refund Policy)

Abstract:

Abstract:

In cases of imaginative contagion, imagining something has doxastic or doxastic-like consequences. In this reply to Tamar Szabó Gendler's article in this collection, I investigate what the philosophical consequences of these cases could be. I argue (i) that imaginative contagion has consequences for how we should understand the nature of imagination and (ii) that imaginative contagion has consequences for our understanding of what belief-forming mechanisms there are. Along the way, I make some remarks about what the consequences of the contagion cases are for the relation between knowledge and imagination.

Keywords: belief; imaginative contagion; knowledge

Document Type: Research Article

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9973.2006.00435.x

Affiliations: Department of Philosophy, University of Aberdeen, Old Brewery, High Street, Aberdeen AB24 3UB, Scotland , Email: m.blaauw@abdn.ac.uk

Publication date: 2006-04-01

  • Access Key
  • Free content
  • Partial Free content
  • New content
  • Open access content
  • Partial Open access content
  • Subscribed content
  • Partial Subscribed content
  • Free trial content
Cookie Policy
X
Cookie Policy
Ingenta Connect website makes use of cookies so as to keep track of data that you have filled in. I am Happy with this Find out more