Epistemic commitment is an obligation, which may be withdrawn only under appropriate circumstances, to uphold the factual truth of a given
proposition
A proposition is a statement that can be either true or false. It is a central concept in the philosophy of language, semantics, logic, and related fields. Propositions are the object s denoted by declarative sentences; for example, "The sky ...
, and to provide reasons for one's
belief
A belief is a subjective Attitude (psychology), attitude that something is truth, true or a State of affairs (philosophy), state of affairs is the case. A subjective attitude is a mental state of having some Life stance, stance, take, or opinion ...
in that proposition.
Epistemic means 'of, or relating to knowledge'. An epistemic commitment of some kind, on the part of the participants, underlies most
argument
An argument is a series of sentences, statements, or propositions some of which are called premises and one is the conclusion. The purpose of an argument is to give reasons for one's conclusion via justification, explanation, and/or persu ...
s. For instance, each participant in an argument would have a position that they are expressing, and an underlying epistemic commitment fundamental to their reasoning.
Example 1
Joe states that
whale
Whales are a widely distributed and diverse group of fully Aquatic animal, aquatic placental mammal, placental marine mammals. As an informal and Colloquialism, colloquial grouping, they correspond to large members of the infraorder Cetacea ...
s are gentle creatures, and as such, should never be killed.
Susan replies that
killer whale
The orca (''Orcinus orca''), or killer whale, is a toothed whale and the largest member of the oceanic dolphin family. The only extant species in the genus '' Orcinus'', it is recognizable by its black-and-white-patterned body. A cosmopolit ...
s are not 'gentle', in fact, they eat
seal pups.
Joe, instead of revising his earlier stated opinion of whales based on new information from Susan, asserts that killer whales must not actually be whales, because a 'true whale eats plankton.' Joe has now redefined 'whale' to suit his argument.
If Susan shows Joe a book which asserts that killer whales are, in fact, whales, then Joe might (or might not) decide to withdraw his epistemic commitment to the original statement about whales.
Example 2
Susan states the killer whales are whales because 'whale' is in their name.
Joe replies that killer whales are not whales but dolphins despite having whale in their name.
Susan, instead of revising her earlier stated opinion of whales based on new information from Joe, asserts that killer whales must be whales because they look like other whales. Susan has now redefined 'whale' to suit her argument.
If Joe shows Susan a book showing that killer whales are, in fact, dolphins, then Susan might (or might not) decide to withdraw her epistemic commitment to the original statement about killer whales.
See also
*
No true Scotsman
No true Scotsman or appeal to purity is an informal fallacy in which one modifies a prior claim in response to a counterexample by asserting the counterexample is excluded by definition. Rather than admitting error or providing evidence to dispro ...
References
*
Concepts in epistemology
{{epistemology-stub