آمار
| تعداد نشریات | 54 |
| تعداد شمارهها | 2,639 |
| تعداد مقالات | 37,346 |
| تعداد مشاهده مقاله | 18,470,549 |
| تعداد دریافت فایل اصل مقاله | 8,425,396 |
Critical Examination of the Cognitive-Analytic Approach to Moral Self-Deception | ||
| Theosophia Islamica | ||
| مقالات آماده انتشار، پذیرفته شده، انتشار آنلاین از تاریخ 26 اسفند 1404 اصل مقاله (1.1 M) | ||
| نوع مقاله: Original Article | ||
| شناسه دیجیتال (DOI): 10.22081/jti.2026.74406.1117 | ||
| نویسنده | ||
| Javad Danesh* | ||
| Assistant Professor, Department of Ethics, Research Institute of Philosophy and Theology, Islamic Sciences and Culture Academy, Qom, Iran. | ||
| تاریخ دریافت: 21 اسفند 1404، تاریخ بازنگری: 13 تیر 1405، تاریخ پذیرش: 26 اسفند 1404 | ||
| چکیده | ||
| The problem of moral self-deception has always been one of the complex puzzles in the philosophy of mind and ethics due to its entanglement with epistemic paradoxes—a phenomenon that seemingly requires the simultaneous acceptance of two incompatible cognitive states, meaning that the agent believes in a proposition while possessing strong evidence to the contrary. Focusing on the cognitive-analytic approach, this article demonstrates that within this framework, the problem transcends mere explanation of neurobiological mechanisms and centers on evaluating the logical possibility of self-deception and the endeavor to escape static and dynamic paradoxes. In the first step, while distinguishing self-deception from similar phenomena such as wishful thinking, the current research emphasizes the central role of motivational components in the formation of beliefs contrary to evidence. In the main section, two prominent models of this approach—the Canfield-Gustafson linguistic model and the Jeffrey Foss epistemological model—are formulated and critiqued. Examinations show that the former, despite attempting to dissolve the paradox through the dissection of ordinary language, falls into reductionism and reduces the phenomenon merely to a belief contrary to evidence. Furthermore, by applying thought experiments such as the swimmers' scenario, it is argued that the evidence-based criterion of Foss also leads to unreasonable and counter-intuitive epistemic consequences. The final conclusion of the article indicates that the cognitive-analytic approach, despite its conceptual precision and logical sensitivity, faces inherent limitations in providing a comprehensive explanation of moral self-deception; because resolving the paradox solely at the cognitive level, while neglecting the normative and phenomenological layers of the agent’s moral experience, leads to overlooking the fundamental dimensions of self-deception. | ||
| کلیدواژهها | ||
| Moral self-deception؛ Cognitive-analytic approach؛ Static and dynamic paradoxes؛ Jeffrey Foss؛ Wishful thinking؛ Canfield؛ Gustafson. | ||
| مراجع | ||
|
Armstrong, D. M. (1973). Belief, truth and knowledge. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Champlin, T. S. (1979). Self-deception and the theory of belief. The Philosophical Quarterly, 29(116), pp. 321–335.
Canfield, J. V., & Gustavson, D. F. (1962). Self-deception. Analysis, 23(2), pp. 32–36.
Cole, M. (1996). Cultural psychology: A once and future discipline. Harvard: University Press.
Damasio, A. R. (1994). Descartes’ error: Emotion, reason, and the human brain. New York City: G. P. Putnam’s Sons.
Davidson, D. (1985). Deception and division. In E. LePore & B. McLaughlin (Eds.), Actions and events: Perspectives on the philosophy of Donald Davidson (pp. 138–148). Oxford: Blackwell.
Dreyfus, H. L. (1992). What computers still can’t do: A critique of artificial reason. Massachusetts: MIT Press.
Fingarette, H. (1969). Self-deception. Humanities Press. (Republished 1998, University of California Press).
Fodor, J. A. (1987). Psychosemantics: The problem of meaning in the philosophy of mind. Cambridge: MIT Press.
Foss, J. (1980). Rethinking self-deception. American Philosophical Quarterly, 17(3), pp. 237–243.
Funkhouser, E. (2019). Self-deception. London: Routledge.
Gur, R. C., & Sackeim, H. A. (1979). Self-deception: A concept in search of a phenomenon. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 37(2), 147–169.
Mele, A. R. (1997). Real self-deception. Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 20(1), 91–102.
Mele, A. R. (2001). Self-deception Unmasked. Princeton: Princeton University Press.
Neisser, U. (1976). Cognition and reality: Principles and implications of cognitive psychology. United States: W. H. Freeman and Company.
Pears, D. (1984). Motivated irrationality. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Pritchard, D. (2005). Epistemic luck. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Sartre, J. P. (1956). Being and nothingness (H. Barnes, Trans.). Philosophical Library. (Original work published 1943).
Searle, J. R. (1980). Minds, brains, and programs. Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 3(3), pp. 417–457.
Trivers, R. (2011). The folly of fools: The logic of deceit and self-deception in human life. New York: Basic Books.
Uttal, W. R. (2001). The New Phrenology: The Limits of Localizing Cognitive Processes in the Brain. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
Vygotsky, L. S. (1978). Mind in society: The development of higher psychological processes (M. Cole, V. John-Steiner, S. Scribner, & E. Souberman, Eds.). Cambridge: Harvard University Press.
Zajonc, R. B. (1980). Feeling and thinking: Preferences need no inferences. American Psychologist, 35(2), pp. 151–175. | ||
|
آمار تعداد مشاهده مقاله: 17 تعداد دریافت فایل اصل مقاله: 4 |
||