Jove
Visualize
Contact Us

Related Concept Videos

Introspection01:29

Introspection

13
Introspection, long upheld as a reliable route to self-knowledge, involves examining one's thoughts, emotions, and mental processes. It underpins many psychological practices, from mindfulness meditation to psychotherapy and self-help strategies. However, empirical evidence challenges the accuracy of introspection as a means of understanding oneself.Limitations of Introspective InsightSeminal work by Nisbett and Wilson demonstrated that individuals are frequently unaware of the true causes...
13
Revisionist Views of Adolescent and Adult Cognition01:24

Revisionist Views of Adolescent and Adult Cognition

127
A revisionist approach to Jean Piaget's theory of cognitive development has brought new insights that challenge and reinterpret his established ideas. Piaget proposed that the formal operational stage, emerging in adolescence, represents the culmination of cognitive maturity. During this stage, individuals are said to develop abstract thinking, engage in systematic problem-solving, and show a form of egocentrism, believing others are as preoccupied with their behavior as they are...
127
Limits to Natural Selection01:38

Limits to Natural Selection

32.7K
Organisms that are well-adapted to their environment are more likely to survive and reproduce. However, natural selection does not lead to perfectly adapted organisms. Several factors constrain natural selection.
32.7K
Self-Discrepancy Theory02:45

Self-Discrepancy Theory

18.5K
One influential perspective on what motivates people's behavior is detailed in Tory Higgin's self-discrepancy theory (Higgins, 1987). He proposed that people hold disagreeing internal representations of themselves that lead to different emotional states.  
18.5K
Fundamental Attribution Error01:14

Fundamental Attribution Error

13.3K
According to some social psychologists, people tend to overemphasize internal factors as explanations—or attributions—for the behavior of other people. They tend to assume that the behavior of another person is a trait of that person, and to underestimate the power of the situation on the behavior of others. They tend to fail to recognize when the behavior of another is due to situational variables, and thus to the person’s state. This erroneous assumption is...
13.3K
Reason and Intuition01:37

Reason and Intuition

7.0K
The human brain processes information for decision-making using one of two routes: an intuitive system and a rational system (Epstein, 1994; popularized by Kahneman, 2011 as System 1 and System 2, respectively). The intuitive system is quick, impulsive, and operates with minimal effort, relying on emotions or habits to provide cues for what to do next, while the rational system is logical, analytical, deliberate, and methodical. Research in neuropsychology suggests that the...
7.0K

You might also read

Related Articles

Articles linked to this work by shared authors, journal, and citation graph.

Sort by
Same author

Dual processes, dual virtues.

Philosophical studiesยท2022
See all related articles
JoVE
x logofacebook logolinkedin logoyoutube logo
ABOUT JoVE
OverviewLeadershipBlogJoVE Help Center
AUTHORS
Publishing ProcessEditorial BoardScope & PoliciesPeer ReviewFAQSubmit
LIBRARIANS
TestimonialsSubscriptionsAccessResourcesLibrary Advisory BoardFAQ
RESEARCH
JoVE JournalMethods CollectionsJoVE Encyclopedia of ExperimentsArchive
EDUCATION
JoVE CoreJoVE BusinessJoVE Science EducationJoVE Lab ManualFaculty Resource CenterFaculty Site
Terms & Conditions of Use
Privacy Policy
Policies

Related Experiment Video

Updated: Oct 6, 2025

Experimental Paradigm for Measuring the Effects of Self-distancing in Young Children
07:01

Experimental Paradigm for Measuring the Effects of Self-distancing in Young Children

Published on: March 1, 2019

8.1K

Epistemic austerity: limits to entitlement.

Jakob Ohlhorst1

  • 1University of Cologne, Cologne, Germany.

Synthese
|January 21, 2022
PubMed
Summary
This summary is machine-generated.

Epistemic entitlement, a belief warrant without evidence, faces the problem of demarcation due to arbitrariness. This arbitrariness undermines warrant, posing a risk to all beliefs, with current solutions failing to address it.

Keywords:
Deep disagreementEpistemic entitlementHinge epistemologyProblem of demarcationRelativism

More Related Videos

Setting Limits on Supersymmetry Using Simplified Models
07:46

Setting Limits on Supersymmetry Using Simplified Models

Published on: November 15, 2013

8.7K
Errors as a Means of Reducing Impulsive Food Choice
07:07

Errors as a Means of Reducing Impulsive Food Choice

Published on: June 5, 2016

8.8K

Related Experiment Videos

Last Updated: Oct 6, 2025

Experimental Paradigm for Measuring the Effects of Self-distancing in Young Children
07:01

Experimental Paradigm for Measuring the Effects of Self-distancing in Young Children

Published on: March 1, 2019

8.1K
Setting Limits on Supersymmetry Using Simplified Models
07:46

Setting Limits on Supersymmetry Using Simplified Models

Published on: November 15, 2013

8.7K
Errors as a Means of Reducing Impulsive Food Choice
07:07

Errors as a Means of Reducing Impulsive Food Choice

Published on: June 5, 2016

8.8K

Area of Science:

  • Epistemology
  • Philosophy of Mind

Background:

  • Epistemic entitlement offers warrant for beliefs without requiring evidential support.
  • The problem of demarcation, a form of epistemic relativism, challenges entitlement theory.
  • Existing explanations for demarcation based on bizarreness or disagreement are insufficient.

Purpose of the Study:

  • To analyze the problem of demarcation in epistemic entitlement.
  • To identify epistemic arbitrariness as the core issue of demarcation.
  • To assess the impact of arbitrariness on entitlement epistemology and proposed solutions.

Main Methods:

  • Presentation of entitlement theory.
  • Examination of the problem of demarcation.
  • Argumentation on the role of epistemic arbitrariness.
  • Evaluation of solutions to the demarcation problem.

Main Results:

  • The problem of demarcation is fundamentally rooted in epistemic arbitrariness.
  • Arbitrariness poses a significant threat to epistemic warrant within entitlement theory.
  • The risk of arbitrariness may generalize to encompass all beliefs.
  • Current proposed solutions inadequately address the risks associated with arbitrariness.

Conclusions:

  • Epistemic arbitrariness is the central challenge for demarcation in entitlement epistemology.
  • The threat of arbitrariness to epistemic warrant is substantial and widespread.
  • Existing strategies for resolving the demarcation problem fail to mitigate the dangers of arbitrariness.