I present an argument against the thesis of Uniqueness and in favour of Permissivism. Counterexamples to Uniqueness are provided, based on 'Safespot' propositions-i.e., a proposition that is guaranteed to be true provided the subject adopts a certain attitude towards it. The argument relies on a plausible principle (roughly stated): If S knows that her believing p would be a true belief, then it is rationally permitted for S to believe p. One motivation for denying this principle-viz opposition to 'epistemic consequentialism'-is briefly discussed. The principle is extended to cover degrees of belief and compared with a couple of other well-known constraints on rational degrees of belief.
- Epistemic consequentialism
ASJC Scopus subject areas