Defending an indirect normativity of belief

Abstract

In this dissertation, I seek to answer the following questions: is there such a thing as deontic epistemic normativity -- obligations, permissions, and prohibitions to act in a certain way based on epistemic grounds -- and if so what does it consist in, and is it important for determining what we ought to do in practical reasoning? I argue for an indirect account of epistemic normativity: epistemic obligations command believers to act in certain ways so as to affect beliefs downstream of their actions. Further, I argue that if an agent commits him/herself to epistemic normativity, then these epistemic obligations can matter for the purposes of practical reason.