Advertisement

Philosophical Studies

, Volume 175, Issue 10, pp 2507–2537 | Cite as

Choosing and refusing: doxastic voluntarism and folk psychology

  • John TurriEmail author
  • David Rose
  • Wesley Buckwalter
Article

Abstract

A standard view in contemporary philosophy is that belief is involuntary, either as a matter of conceptual necessity or as a contingent fact of human psychology. We present seven experiments on patterns in ordinary folk-psychological judgments about belief. The results provide strong evidence that voluntary belief is conceptually possible and, granted minimal charitable assumptions about folk-psychological competence, provide some evidence that voluntary belief is psychologically possible. We also consider two hypotheses in an attempt to understand why many philosophers have been tempted to view belief as involuntary: that belief is a prototype concept and that belief is a dual character concept. Altogether, our findings contribute to longstanding philosophical debates about the relationship between the will and the intellect, while also advancing scientific understanding of important social judgments.

Keywords

Voluntarism Involuntarism Belief The will Folk psychology Dual character concepts 

Notes

Acknowledgements

For helpful feedback, we thank Carolyn Buckwalter, Carl Ginet, Joshua Knobe, Shaun Nichols, Jonathan Schaffer, and Angelo Turri. Thanks also to an audience at Cornell University and this journal’s anonymous referees. This research was supported by the Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council of Canada, the Ontario Ministry of Economic Development and Innovation, and the Canada Research Chairs program.

Supplementary material

11098_2017_970_MOESM1_ESM.txt (6 kb)
Supplementary material 1 (TXT 6 kb)

References

  1. Alston, W. P. (1988). The deontological concept of epistemic justification. Philosophical Perspectives, 2, 257–299.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Alston, W. P. (1989). Epistemic justification: Essays in the theory of knowledge. Ithaca: Cornell University Press.Google Scholar
  3. American Psychiatric Association. (2000). Diagnostic and statistical manual of mental disorders (4th ed.). Arlington County: American Psychiatric Publishing.Google Scholar
  4. Anscombe, G. E. M. (1957). Intention. Oxford: Blackwell.Google Scholar
  5. Arnauld, A. (1641/2006). Fourth set of objections. In R. Ariew & D. Cress (Ed. & Trans.), Meditations, objections, and replies. Indianapolis: Hackett.Google Scholar
  6. Baldwin, D. A, & Tomasello, M. (1998). Word learning: A window on early pragmatic understanding. In E. V. Clark (Ed.), The proceedings of the twenty-ninth annual child language research forum. Stanford: Center for the Study of Language and Information.Google Scholar
  7. Baron-Cohen, S. (1995). Mindblindness: An essay on autism and theory of mind. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
  8. Bartsch, K., & Wellman, H. M. (1995). Children talk about the mind. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  9. Beauregard, M., Lévesque, J., & Bourgouin, P. (2001). Neural correlates of conscious self-regulation of emotion. The Journal of Neuroscience, 21, 1–6.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Bennett, J. (1990). Why is belief involuntary? Analysis, 50, 87–107.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Buckareff, A. A. (2004). Acceptance and deciding to believe. Journal of Philosophical Research, 29, 173–190.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Buckareff, A. A. (2006). Doxastic decisions and controlling belief. Acta Analytica, 21, 102–114.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Buckwalter, W., Rose, D., & Turri, J. (2015). Belief through thick and thin. Nous, 49(4), 748–775. doi: 10.1111/nous.12048.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Chisholm, R. (1964). Human freedom and the self. Lawrence: University of Kansas.Google Scholar
  15. Cohen, L. J. (1992). An essay on belief and acceptance. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  16. Descartes, R. (1644/1985). The principles of philosophy. In J. Cottingham, R. Stoothoff, & D. Murdoch (Trans.), The philosophical writings of Descartes (Vol. 1). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  17. Doris, J. M. (2002). Lack of character: Personality and moral behavior. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Egan, A. (2009). Imagination, delusions, and self-deception. In T. Bayne & J. Fernández (Eds.), Self-deception and affective influences on belief-formation (pp. 263–280). Hove: Psychology Press.Google Scholar
  19. Ellis, P. (2010). The essential guide to effect sizes: Statistical power, meta-analysis and the interpretation of research results. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Feldman, R. (2001). Voluntary belief and epistemic evaluation. In M. Steup (Ed.), Knowledge, truth, and duty (pp. 77–92). Oxford: Oxford UP.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Feldman, R. (2007). Modest deontologism in epistemology. Synthese, 161(3), 339–355.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Fillmore, C. J. (1975). An alternative to checklist theories of meaning. In Proceedings of the annual meeting of the Berkeley Linguistics Society (pp. 123–131).Google Scholar
  23. Fodor, J. (1987). Psychosemantics. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
  24. Frankish, K. (2007). Deciding to believe again. Mind, 116(463), 523–548. doi: 10.1093/mind/fzm523.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Ginet, C. (2001). Deciding to believe. In Matthias Steup (Ed.), Knowledge, truth and duty (pp. 63–76). Oxford: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Gopnik, A., & Meltzoff, A. (1997). Words, thoughts and theories. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
  27. Harman, G. (1999). Moral philosophy meets social psychology: Virtue ethics and the fundamental attribution error. Proceedings of the Aristotelian Society, 99, 315–331.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Heller, M. (2000). Hobartian voluntarism: Grounding a deontological conception of epistemic justification. Pacific Philosophical Quarterly, 81, 130–141. doi: 10.1111/1468-0114.00099.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Hieronymi, P. (2006). Controlling attitudes. Pacific Philosophical Quarterly, 87(1), 45–74.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Hieronymi, P. (2009). Believing at Will. Canadian Journal of Philosophy, 39(supplemental issue), 149–188.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Hobbes, T. (1641/2006). Third set of objections, by a famous English philosopher. In R. Ariew & D. Cress (Ed. & Trans.), Meditations, objections, and replies. Indianapolis: Hackett.Google Scholar
  32. James, W. (1948). The will to believe. In A. Castell (Ed.), Essays in pragmatism (pp. 88–109). New York: Hafner Press.Google Scholar
  33. Johnston, M. (1995). Self-deception and the nature of mind. In C. MacDonald & G. MacDonald (Eds.), Philosophy of psychology. Cambridge, MA: Blackwell.Google Scholar
  34. Kitcher, P. S. (1984). In defense of intentional psychology. Journal of Philosophy, 81, 89–106.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Knobe, J., Prasada, S., & Newman, G. E. (2013). Dual character concepts and the normative dimension of conceptual representation. Cognition, 127(2), 242–257. doi: 10.1016/j.cognition.2013.01.005.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Kuhn, T. S. (1962/2012). The structure of scientific revolutions. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
  37. Lahav, R. (1992). The amazing predictive power of folk psychology. Australasian Journal of Philosophy, 70, 99–105.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Lehrer, P., Sasaki, Y., & Saito, Y. (1999). Zazen and cardiac variability. Psychosomatic Medicine, 61(6), 812–821.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Leslie, A. (1992). Autism and the ‘theory of mind’ module. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 1, 18–21.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Levy, N., & Mandelbaum, E. (2014). The powers that bind: doxastic voluntarism and epistemic obligation. In J. Matheson & R. Vitz (Eds.), The ethics of belief (pp. 15–32). Oxford: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Lewis, D. (1980). Mad pain and Martian pain. In N. Block (Ed.), Readings in philosophy of psychology (Vol. 1). Cambridge: Harvard.Google Scholar
  42. Malle, B. F. (2003). The social cognition of intentional action. In P. W. Halligan, C. Bass, & D. A. Oakley (Eds.), Malingering and illness deception (pp. 83–92). Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  43. McCabe, K., Smith, V., & Lepore, M. (2000). Intentionality detection and ‘mindreading’: Why does game form matter? Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 94, 4404–4409.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Montmarquet, J. (1986). The voluntariness of belief. Analysis, 46, 49–53.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Naylor, M. B. (1985). Voluntary belief. Philosophy and Phenomenological Research, 45(3), 427–436.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Ochsner, K., & Gross, J. (2005). The cognitive control of emotion. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 9(5), 242–249. doi: 10.1016/j.tics.2005.03.010.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. O’haughnessy, B. (1980). The will. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  48. O’Neill, D. K., Astington, J. W., & Flavell, J. H. (1992). Young children’s understanding of the role that sensory experiences play in knowledge acquisition. Child Development, 63(2), 474–490. doi: 10.1111/j.1467-8624.1992.tb01641.x.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. Perner, J. (1991). Understanding the representational mind. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
  50. Plantinga, A. (1993). Warrant and proper function. Oxford: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. Pojman, L. P. (1985). Believing and willing. Canadian Journal of Philosophy, 15(1), 37–55.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. Pojman, L. P. (Ed.). (1999). Believing, willing, and the ethics of belief. In The theory of knowledge (2nd ed.). Belmont, CA: Wadsworth.Google Scholar
  53. Rosch, E., & Mervis, C. B. (1975). Family resemblances: Studies in the internal structure of categories. Cognitive Psychology, 7(4), 573–605. doi: 10.1016/0010-0285(75)90024-9.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  54. Rose, D., Buckwalter, W., & Turri, J. (2014). When words speak louder than actions: Delusion, belief and the power of assertion. Australasian Journal of Philosophy, 92(4), 683–700. doi: 10.1080/00048402.2014.909859.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  55. Rose, D., & Schaffer, J. (2013). Knowledge entails dispositional belief. Philosophical Studies. doi: 10.1007/s11098-012-0052-z.Google Scholar
  56. Ross, L., & Nisbett, R. E. (2011). The person and the situation: Perspectives of social psychology. London: Pinter & Martin.Google Scholar
  57. Ryan, S. (2003). Doxastic compatibilism and the ethics of belief. Philosophical Studies, 114(1), 47–79.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  58. Scheines, R. (1997). An introduction to causal inference. In V. McKim & S. Turner (Eds.), Causality in crisis (8th ed., pp. 185–200). Notre Dame: University of Notre Dame Press.Google Scholar
  59. Schwitzgebel, E. (2011). Mad belief? Neuroethics, 5(1), 13–17.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  60. Scott-Kakures, D. (1994). On belief and captivity of the will. Philosophy and Phenomenological Research, 54, 77–103.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  61. Shah, N. (2002). Clearing space for doxastic voluntarism. The Monist, 85(3), 436–445.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  62. Steup, M. (2008). Doxastic freedom. Synthese, 161(3), 375–392.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  63. Thagard, P. (1990). Concepts and conceptual change. Synthese, 82(2), 255–274. doi: 10.1007/BF00413664.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  64. Turri, J. (2015a). Skeptical appeal: The source-content bias. Cognitive Science, 39(2), 307–324. doi: 10.1111/cogs.12153.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  65. Turri, J. (2015b). An open and shut case: Epistemic closure in the manifest image. Philosophers’ Imprint, 15(2), 1–18.Google Scholar
  66. Turri, J. (in press). Sustaining rules: A model and application. In J. A. Carter, E. C. Gordon, & B. Jarvis (Eds.), Knowledge first. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  67. Van Fraassen, C. (1984). Belief and the will. The Journal of Philosophy, 81(5), 235–256.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  68. Vitz, R. (2008). Doxastic voluntarism. In J. Fieser & B. Dowden (Eds.), Internet encyclopedia of philosophy. Retrieved November 2013, from http://www.iep.utm.edu/doxa-vol/
  69. Wang, J. J., Miletich, D. D., Ramsey, R., & Samson, D. (2014). Adults see vision to be more informative than it is. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 67(12), 2279–2292. doi: 10.1080/17470218.2014.915331.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  70. Wellman, H. (1990). The child’s theory of mind. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
  71. Weatherson, B. (2008). Deontology and Descartes’s demon. Journal of Philosophy, 105(9), 540–569.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  72. Williams, B. (1973). Deciding to believe. In Bernard Williams (Ed.), Problems of the self. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  73. Winters, B. (1979). Believing at will. Journal of Philosophy, 76, 243–256.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  74. Wittgenstein, L. (1953). Philosophical investigations. (G. E. M. Anscombe, Trans.). Oxford: Basil Blackwell.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media B.V. 2017

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Philosophy DepartmentUniversity of WaterlooWaterlooCanada
  2. 2.Cognitive Science ProgramUniversity of WaterlooWaterlooCanada
  3. 3.Philosophy DepartmentRutgers University, New BrunswickNew BrunswickUSA

Personalised recommendations