Here, I defend PC against some objections.* [ *Based on: “Phenomenal Conservatism Uber Alles,” in Seemings and Justification: New Essays on Dogmatism and Phenomenal Conservatism (Oxford University Press, 2013), pp. 328-50. ] Background Phenomenal Conservatism (PC) holds that, in the absence of defeaters, you have justification for believing whatever seems to you to be the case. I discussed this idea previously:
Cognitive penetration by society on my young child brain is my biggest concern about my ethical intuitions. So while I believe I'm justified in believing some of my ethical intuitions, I have a hard time evaluating whether or not they have defeaters, particularly as the ethical intuitions are simpler or more fundamental. I would like to know how I can better investigate these potential penetration biases.
This picture by DALL-E is much better than the previous ones! Still has a long way to go with text though :)
Cognitive penetration by society on my young child brain is my biggest concern about my ethical intuitions. So while I believe I'm justified in believing some of my ethical intuitions, I have a hard time evaluating whether or not they have defeaters, particularly as the ethical intuitions are simpler or more fundamental. I would like to know how I can better investigate these potential penetration biases.