Titlebook: Believing and Accepting; Pascal Engel Book 2000 Springer Science+Business Media Dordrecht 2000 cognitive science.concept.issue.language.mi

明确

Geschichte der Pulverlackierung,ent, when true or justified, the final aim of science, to be also responsible for overt behavior, articulated with desire according to some pragmatic formula, and so on. If inconsistency is the case, the best thing to do is to divide this unmanageable empire of beliefehood into separate provinces: o

amorphous

大吃大喝

DENT

Introduction: The Varieties of Belief and Acceptance,emological questions about what differentiates belief from knowledge, nor from questions about the meanings of the sentences through which we attribute beliefs to other people or to ourselves, and the latter cannot be separated from the former. A good example of these interconnections is provided by

hemorrhage

Ataxia

Why Acceptance that , Does Not Entail that ,, So the issue about whether or not acceptance that . entails belief that . is left quite untouched by the fact that Clarke’s distinction can be drawn in the case of belief-ascriptions. Clarke says that without having the right kind of belief-ascriptions available we should lack any basis for evaluat

instate

,Moore’s Paradox,et, driven by greed, accepts the stockbroker’s forecast that he, the punter, will make stupendous financial gains. And one could use Cohen as a guide to good parenting: accept what your child says, even though you don’t believe a word of it. Again, the use that Cohen makes of his distinction to moll

SPECT

landfill

Tracheotomy

Intuitive and Reflective Beliefs,stemological respects, but different in cognitive organisation and role. I call these two psychological categories intuitive beliefs and reflective beliefs. In this paper, I would like to develop the argument in a manner that addresses questions and objections that I have received from psychologists and philosophers of mind.