Abstract

It’s a well-recognized truth that what’s morally or politically required can come apart from what’s best for you individually. But this thought—the thought that what’s epistemically required may be divorced from what’s epistemically best for you—is mostly absent in epistemology. On the traditional picture, epistemic obligations are assumed to be self-regarding. In this paper, I argue against this dogma. I argue that we have other-regarding epistemic obligations and epistemic obligations to the groups we are members of. Further, I show how these obligations can play a role in justifying the levying of epistemic taxes.