Faith and the practical self
Bibliographic Data
| ID | 21334875 |
|---|---|
| Authors | Nilanjan Das (0000-0002-0100-3436, University of Toronto, corresponding author) |
| Year | 2025 |
| Volume | 68 |
| Issue | 7 |
| Pages | 2497-2505 |
| Publication date | 2025-08-09 |
| Open Access | No |
| Type | ARTICLE |
| Venue | Inquiry (JOURNAL) |
| Journal identifiers | ISSN: 0020-174X • E-ISSN: 1502-3923 |
| Publisher | Informa UK Limited (PUBLISHER • GB) |
| DOI | 10.1080/0020174x.2025.2470869 |
| OpenAlex | W4408192811 |
| Language | EN |
| References cited | 2 |
Gomes' The Practical Self is a rich and ambitious exploration of the connection between self-consciousness and objectivity. The argument of the book is this. As self-conscious creatures, we are required to have faith in ourselves as agents of our thinking. Our faith in ourselves as agents of our thinking is sustained by our participation in a practice—our practice of holding each other accountable for our attitudes. To participate in such a practice, we have to be connected to other persons, and therefore to an objective world. So, as self-conscious creatures, we are connected to an objective world. In this paper, I will be concerned with the first premise of this argument. For Gomes, an agent is required to have faith in a proposition p just in case (i) the proposition p is theoretically undecidable but (ii) the agent is practically required to assent to it. I will question Gomes’ claim that the proposition that we are agents of our thinking is theoretically undecidable. And I will express scepticism—from a different direction—about his claim that we are practically required to assent to the existence of a self that serves as an agent of thinking
Faith · Theology · Epistemology, Ethics, and Metaphysics · Medicine · Philosophical Ethics and Theory · Philosophy · Political Philosophy and Ethics
| Highly cited | No |
|---|