Against Evidential Minimalism

Abstract Evidence is often taken to be “normative” for doxastic agents. What accounts the normativity of evidence? According view that I'll call “evidential minimalism”, there a close connection between strong evidence truth p and normative reason believe p: either itself belief, or gives rise such when certain other minimal conditions are met. In this paper, I argue against evidential minimalism. will cases where: (i) an individual S possesses E at time t, (ii) all met (iii) doesn't yet (iv) isn't open any form criticism on account (i)–(iii) t. then formulate plausible linking claim connecting openness existence reasons belief. The minimalist can accept reject claim. that, way, falters.