Justified Belief, Reasons, and Evidence

2019 ◽  
pp. 23-42
Author(s):  
Alan Millar
Keyword(s):  
Normative Reasons ◽  
Evidence Based ◽  
Reasons For Belief ◽  
Justified Belief ◽  
Motivating Reasons ◽  
The Subject

Normative reasons for belief—reasons to believe something—are constituted by truths or facts. Such reasons are distinguished from motivating reasons for belief, that is, reasons for which a subject believes something. These are constituted by considerations that the subject treats as reasons to believe. One has a justified belief, in the sense of a well-founded belief, only if the considerations that constitute one’s motivating reason are truths that one knows. Evidence-based knowledge that P is explicated in terms truths or facts that provide an adequate reason to believe that P. It is argued that not all knowledge is evidence-based, and suggested that we need to make sense of the idea that evidence adequate for knowledge is clinching evidence. The discussion addresses a problem raised by Jennifer Hornsby about the distinction between normative and motivating reasons.

Evidence and Its Limits

2018 ◽  
Author(s):  
Clayton Littlejohn
Keyword(s):  
Epistemic Justification ◽  
Normative Reasons ◽  
Justified Belief ◽  
Evidential Support ◽  
Way Of Thinking

On a standard way of thinking about the relationships between evidence, reasons, and epistemic justification, a subject’s evidence consists of her potential reasons for her beliefs, these reasons constitute the normative reasons that bear on whether to believe, and justification is taken to result from relations between a subject’s potential reasons for her beliefs and those beliefs. This chapter argues that this view makes a number of mistakes about the rational roles of reasons and evidence and explores some parallels between practical and theoretical reasons. Just as justified action is unobjectionable action, justified belief is unobjectionable belief. Just as you cannot object to someone deciding to do something simply on the grounds that their reasons for acting didn’t give them strong reason to act, you cannot object to someone believing something simply on the grounds that they didn’t believe for reasons that gave their beliefs strong evidential support.

Essential Dental Public Health

2013 ◽  
Author(s):  
Blánaid Daly ◽  
Paul Batchelor ◽  
Elizabeth Treasure ◽  
Richard Watt
Keyword(s):  
Public Health ◽  
Health Promotion ◽  
Vital Role ◽  
Evidence Based ◽  
Dental Public Health ◽  
Oral Health Promotion ◽  
Dental Practitioners ◽  
The World ◽  
The Subject ◽  
Based Medicine

Public health is a key concern of modern dental practitioners as they continue to play a vital role in the health of populations across the world. The second edition of Essential Dental Public Health identifies the links between clinical practice and public health with a strong emphasis on evidence-based medicine. Fully revised and updated for a second edition, this textbook is split into four parts covering all the need-to-know aspects of the subject: the principles of dental public health, oral epidemiology, prevention and oral health promotion, and the governance and organization of health services. Essential Dental Public Health is an ideal introduction to the field for dentistry undergraduates, as well as being a helpful reference for postgraduates and practitioners.

scholarly journals Epistemic Blame and the Normativity of Evidence

Erkenntnis ◽  
2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Sebastian Schmidt
Keyword(s):  
Conclusive Evidence ◽  
Normative Reasons ◽  
Epistemic Reasons ◽  
Epistemic Norms ◽  
Plausible Assumption ◽  
Reasons For Belief ◽  
Normative Force ◽  
Epistemic Trust ◽  
Conceptual Connection ◽  
Epistemic Blame

AbstractThe normative force of evidence can seem puzzling. It seems that having conclusive evidence for a proposition does not, by itself, make it true that one ought to believe the proposition. But spelling out the condition that evidence must meet in order to provide us with genuine normative reasons for belief seems to lead us into a dilemma: the condition either fails to explain the normative significance of epistemic reasons or it renders the content of epistemic norms practical. The first aim of this paper is to spell out this challenge for the normativity of evidence. I argue that the challenge rests on a plausible assumption about the conceptual connection between normative reasons and blameworthiness. The second aim of the paper is to show how we can meet the challenge by spelling out a concept of epistemic blameworthiness. Drawing on recent accounts of doxastic responsibility and epistemic blame, I suggest that the normativity of evidence is revealed in our practice of suspending epistemic trust in response to impaired epistemic relationships. Recognizing suspension of trust as a form of epistemic blame allows us to make sense of a purely epistemic kind of normativity the existence of which has recently been called into doubt by certain versions of pragmatism and instrumentalism.

scholarly journals JUSTIFIED BELIEF IN A DIGITAL AGE: ON THE EPISTEMIC IMPLICATIONS OF SECRET INTERNET TECHNOLOGIES

Episteme ◽  
2013 ◽  
Vol 10 (2) ◽  
pp. 117-134 ◽  
Author(s):  
Boaz Miller ◽  
Isaac Record
Keyword(s):  
Conceptual Framework ◽  
Search Engines ◽  
Digital Age ◽  
Epistemic Responsibility ◽  
Modes Of Operation ◽  
Internet Technologies ◽  
Justified Belief ◽  
The Subject ◽  
Shed Light ◽  
Justificatory Status

AbstractPeople increasingly form beliefs based on information gained from automatically filtered internet sources such as search engines. However, the workings of such sources are often opaque, preventing subjects from knowing whether the information provided is biased or incomplete. Users' reliance on internet technologies whose modes of operation are concealed from them raises serious concerns about the justificatory status of the beliefs they end up forming. Yet it is unclear how to address these concerns within standard theories of knowledge and justification. To shed light on the problem, we introduce a novel conceptual framework that clarifies the relations between justified belief, epistemic responsibility, action and the technological resources available to a subject. We argue that justified belief is subject to certain epistemic responsibilities that accompany the subject's particular decision-taking circumstances, and that one typical responsibility is to ascertain, so far as one can, whether the information upon which the judgment will rest is biased or incomplete. What this responsibility comprises is partly determined by the inquiry-enabling technologies available to the subject. We argue that a subject's beliefs that are formed based on internet-filtered information are less justified than they would be if she either knew how filtering worked or relied on additional sources, and that the subject may have the epistemic responsibility to take measures to enhance the justificatory status of such beliefs.

The Diagnostic Assessment of Suspected Pulmonary Embolism on the Acute Medical Take: An Evidence Based Guide

2007 ◽  
Vol 6 (1) ◽  
pp. 20-26
Author(s):  
Alastair Proudfoot ◽  
◽  
Derek Bell ◽  
Keyword(s):  
Risk Factors ◽  
Pulmonary Embolism ◽  
Venous Thromboembolism ◽  
Clinical Presentation ◽  
Diagnostic Assessment ◽  
Evidence Based ◽  
Suspected Pulmonary Embolism ◽  
The Subject ◽  
Adjusted Incidence ◽  
Age And Sex

Pulmonary Embolism is a common cardiopulmonary illness with an age and sex adjusted incidence of around 117 cases per 100 000 person years. The clinical presentation is extremely heterogeneous and non specific. Risk factors for venous thromboembolism are well established. When combined with presenting features and investigations. a multimodality algorithm has led to significant changes in the diagnostic approach of suspected PE. While the best combination of tests for any individual patient remains the subject of controversy this article aims to rationalise the acute physician’s approach to diagnosis and use of available investigations.

scholarly journals Apprehensions of nurse managers on evidence-based practice

2017 ◽  
Vol 22 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Fernanda Carolina Camargo ◽  
Mayla Borges Goulart ◽  
Helena Hemiko Iwamoto ◽  
Maria Rizoneide Negreiros de Araújo ◽  
Divanice Contim
Keyword(s):  
Teaching Hospital ◽  
Diffusion Of Innovations ◽  
Nurse Managers ◽  
Evidence Based Practice ◽  
Scientific Production ◽  
Evidence Based ◽  
Semantic Categories ◽  
Timely Access ◽  
The Subject ◽  
Textual Records

Abstract Objective: To analyze the apprehensions of nurse managers in the implementation of the Evidence Based Practice in a Teaching Hospital of Triângulo Mineiro. Method: Qualitative research guided by the Theory of the Diffusion of Innovations. Five workshops were conducted per focal group (n = 18 participants), conducted by hermeneutic-dialectic interactions between August and September/2016. Textual records resulting from each workshop were analyzed by semantic categories. Results: Aspects conditioning to the implementation of the Evidence Based Practice permeate from elements related to the fragmentation of the care network to the necessary expansion of the governability of the nurse managers to put changes into practice in their sectors. Most importantly, timely access to the results of research conducted at the teaching hospital was mentioned as crucial to guide better practices. Final considerations: The approach allowed the recognition of contextual conditions for the implementation of the Evidence-Based Practice, which may coincide with similar scenarios, as well as increase the national scientific production on the subject, which is still scarce.

scholarly journals The internet racing ahead of the scientific evidence: the case of "liberation treatment" for multiple sclerosis

2011 ◽  
Vol 69 (3) ◽  
pp. 525-527 ◽  
Author(s):  
Yára Dadalti Fragoso
Keyword(s):  
Multiple Sclerosis ◽  
Neurological Disease ◽  
Venous Insufficiency ◽  
Scientific Evidence ◽  
The Internet ◽  
Evidence Based ◽  
The World ◽  
Internet Discussion ◽  
The Central Nervous System ◽  
The Subject

Multiple sclerosis (MS) is a chronic neurological disease that typically affects young adults. A recent publication suggested that MS might originate from insufficient blood drainage in certain areas of the central nervous system. The condition was named chronic cerebrospinal venous insufficiency (CCSVI). Other papers have not confirmed these findings and, therefore, the matter remains controversial. Nineteen months after the original publication on CCSVI and MS, another 22 papers have been published addressing the matter. No clinical trials have been carried out on the subject and there is no evidence-based indication to perform surgical vascular procedures in MS patients. However, over the same nineteen-month period, the internet discussion on the subject of CCSVI and MS has led to countless websites advertising treatment using vascular surgery for patients with MS all over the world. The treatment based on the CCSVI theory has appealingly been called "liberation treatment", thus making it difficult to explain to patients why a treatment that has been highly praised (on the internet) cannot be recommended based on partial medical results that await confirmation.

scholarly journals Journal Clubs

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Cecilia Black Fylking ◽  
Elin Opheim
Keyword(s):  
Applied Sciences ◽  
Nursing Students ◽  
Evidence Based Practice ◽  
Theory And Practice ◽  
Research Articles ◽  
Evidence Based ◽  
Journal Clubs ◽  
University Of Applied Sciences ◽  
The Subject ◽  
Academic Genre

Journal clubs are closely interlinked with evidence based practice. At Faculty of Social and Health Sciences at Inland Norway University of Applied Sciences our students are required to write literature reviews for their bachelor degree, and there is an increasing need for guiding the students into academic methodology through critically assessing research articles.  The purposes of starting journal clubs at our faculty is to guide the students into the academic genre, to help them gain confidence in reading research articles, and to broaden the perspective between theory and practice. Better semester grade is a secondary goal to our aim as it probably is hard to operationalize. We wish to establish a cooperation with the faculty staff, especially the ones involved in teaching evidence based practice.  Wilson & Deighton (2016) describes that students find it difficult to approach research articles, and that journal clubs are suitable and an activating manner to introduce the students to the academic genre. Deenadayalan et al. (2008) comments that using case studies as a basis for academic discussion, fills the gap between theory and practical approach to the subject. There are several elements to pay attention to if the journal clubs are to become a success, and Deenadayalan et al. (2008) emphasizes among other things a clear purpose for the students' involvement, as well as leadership, insentives and preparedness. In our project dating, we wish to discuss the possibility to do pilots for nursing students either in the last semesters of their courses, or with master students. We are interested in previous experiences with nursing students, and we want to look into which factors that makes the clubs function and how our aim might be reached.

Oxford Handbook of Cancer Nursing

2019 ◽  
Keyword(s):  
Cancer Biology ◽  
Complementary Therapies ◽  
Systematic Approach ◽  
Advanced Disease ◽  
Current Evidence ◽  
Evidence Based ◽  
Cancer Nursing ◽  
Previous Edition ◽  
The Subject ◽  
Living With Cancer

Taking a systematic approach to the main areas of cancer nursing practice, the Oxford Handbook of Cancer Nursing 2nd edition covers all aspects of cancer care. It guides the user from pre-diagnosis, through treatment, to issues of advanced disease and palliative care. It includes cancer biology, genetics and treatments, as well as new targeted and complementary therapies. It follows a patient-centred approach, with a greater emphasis on survivorship and living with cancer than the previous edition, to reflect changes in prognosis for many different cancers. It is fully updated to follow the current evidence-based research, and takes a multidisciplinary view of the subject.

scholarly journals Global Health with Justice: Controlling the Floodgates of the Upstream Determinants of Health through Evidence-Based Law

2020 ◽  
Vol 13 (1) ◽  
pp. 4-9
Author(s):  
John Coggon ◽  
Lawrence O Gostin
Keyword(s):  
Global Health ◽  
Social Determinants Of Health ◽  
Social Determinants ◽  
Determinants Of Health ◽  
Evidence Based ◽  
Special Issue ◽  
The Social ◽  
Georgetown University ◽  
The Subject ◽  
Upstream Determinants

Abstract This article introduces a special issue on the legal determinants of health, following the publication of the Lancet–O’Neill Institute of Georgetown University Commission’s report on the subject. We contextualize legal determinants as a significant and vital aspect of the social determinants of health, explain the work of the Lancet–O’Neill Commission and outline where consequent research will usefully be directed. We also introduce the papers that follow in the special issue, which together set out in greater detail the work of the Commission and critically engage with different aspects of the report and the application of its findings and recommendations.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document