On the Offense against Fanaticism

2024/12/03 by Christopher Bottomley, Timothy Luke Williamson · 1 voice · 1 citation
Arts and Humanities · Psychology · Social Sciences · #Law in Society and Culture #Pragmatism in Philosophy and Education #Psychoanalysis, Philosophy, and Politics

paper · doi:10.1086/732617

openalex publication_date 2024/12/03 · openalex created_date 2025/10/10 · openalex updated_date 2026/07/28

Abstract

Fanatics claim that we must give up guaranteed goods in pursuit of extremely improbable Utopia. Recently, Wilkinson has defended Fanaticism by arguing that nonfanatics must violate at least one plausible rational requirement. We reject Fanaticism. We show that by taking stakes-sensitive risk attitudes seriously, we can resist the core premises in Wilkinson’s argument.

Cited by

• Fragility of Value under Imperfect Alignment

Discussions

• Christopher Bottomley and Timothy Luke Williamson On the Offense against Fanaticism, an ETHICS Discussion of Hayden Wilkinson’s In Defense of Fanaticism at doi.org/10.1086/732617 #philsky #PolTheory # [bsky, 2 points, 0 comments]

Related

• Moral Uncertainty and the Problem of Fanaticism
• Rational reasons for irrational beliefs.
• How not to be generous to fine-tuning sceptics
• Limitations of Skeptical Default Reasoning
• On the Pessimistic Induction and Two Fallacies