Norms and Significance in Ignorance. Reply to Duncan Pritchard
ABSTRACT This is a reply to Duncan Pritchard's response to my critique of his normative account of ignorance. Pritchard suggests that I take a Normative Condition on board in my own account of ignorance. Pritchard's suggestion has drastic revisionary and deflationary implications for how we use words like “ignorance” and “ignorant”. I explain why I believe this is unnecessary: one can perfectly well be ignorant without displaying any kind of intellectual fault. Pritchard does convincingly show, though, that the Signifcance Condition of my account of ignorance needs revision. I explain that we can revise it by allowing for both subjective and objective significance.
Authors
- Rik Peels (ORCID: https://orcid.org/0000-0001-8107-5992)
Institutions
- Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam (NL)
Publication Details
- Journal
- Philosophical Issues
- Published
- 2025-10-01
- DOI
- https://doi.org/10.1111/phis.70016
- Primary Topic
- Philosophical Ethics and Theory
- Type
- article
- Field-Weighted Citation Impact
- 0.00
Funders
- European Commission
- Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam
- Nederlandse Organisatie voor Wetenschappelijk Onderzoek