Abstract: Gameplay and the associated attitudes are important for establishing epistemic permissibility in a range of cases. Or so I argue. I make this argument by comparing pseudo-intellectual communities to what I call Epistemic LARPing communities (examples include Model UN and Ethics Bowl). These two kinds of communities share many structural features, as well as providing community members with similar epistemic and prudential benefits. The epistemically relevant difference is that Epistemi…
Read moreAbstract: Gameplay and the associated attitudes are important for establishing epistemic permissibility in a range of cases. Or so I argue. I make this argument by comparing pseudo-intellectual communities to what I call Epistemic LARPing communities (examples include Model UN and Ethics Bowl). These two kinds of communities share many structural features, as well as providing community members with similar epistemic and prudential benefits. The epistemically relevant difference is that Epistemic LARPing communities are engaged in gameplay, whereas other kinds of pseudo-intellectual communities are not. The attitudes involved in gameplay make it epistemically permissible to join Epistemic LARPing groups. I give an account of how this works.
