Publications

(For publications in Dutch, click on the Dutch flag above.)

A. Books

  1. Rik Peels. (2017). Responsible Belief: A Theory in Ethics and Epistemology (New York: Oxford University Press)

  2. Rik Peels, René van Woudenberg. (2019). The Cambridge Companion to Common Sense Philosophy (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press)

  3. Rik Peels, Jeroen de Ridder, René van Woudenberg. (2019). Scientific Challenges to Common Sense Philosophy (Oxford: Routledge)

  4. Hans van Eyghen, Rik Peels, and Gijsbert Van den Brink, eds. (2018). New Developments in the Cognitive Science of Religion: The Rationality of Religious Belief (Dordrecht Springer)

  5. Jeroen de Ridder, Rik Peels, René van Woudenberg, eds. (2018). Scientism: Prospects and Problems (New York: Oxford University Press)

  6. Rik Peels, Martijn Blaauw, eds. (2017). The Epistemic Dimensions of Ignorance (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press)

  7. Rik Peels, ed. (2017). Perspectives on Ignorance from Moral and Social Philosophy (New York/Oxford: Routledge)


B. Journal Articles (Selection)


41. Rik Peels, Duncan Pritchard. (2019). “University Education Should Aim at Ignorance”, Synthese, forthcoming

40. Rik Peels. (2019). “Replication and Replicability in the Humanities”, Research Integrity and Peer Review, forthcoming

39. Rik Peels. (2019). “Exploring the Boundaries of Ignorance: Its Nature and Accidental Features”, Social Epistemology Review and Reply Collective 8.1, 10-18.

38. Rik Peels. (2018). “Can God Be Jealous?”, The Heythrop Journal 60, forthcoming

37. Rik Peels, Lex Bouter. (2018). “The Possibility and Desirability for Replication in the Humanities”, Palgrave Communications 4:95, DOI: 10.1057/s41599-018-0149-x, reprinted in Quantitative Methodologies: Novel Applications in the Humanities and Social Sciences

36. Rik Peels, Lex Bouter. (2018). “Replication Drive for Humanities”, Nature 558, 372

35. Rik Peels. (2018). “Response to Zimmerman, Steup, Booth, and Kalis & Schaubroeck”, International Journal of Philosophical Studies, forthcoming

34. Rik Peels. (2018). “Précis”, International Journal of Philosophical Studies, forthcoming

33. Rik Peels. (2018). “The Influence View on Responsible Belief: Reply to Kulp, Levy, Rossi, and Goldberg”, Teorema: International Journal of Philosophy 37.2, forthcoming

32. Rik Peels. (2018). “Précis: The Importance and Complexities of Believing Responsibly” Teorema: International Journal of Philosophy 37.2, forthcoming

31. Rik Peels. (2018). “Epistemic Values in the Humanities and the Sciences”, History of Humanities 3.1, 89-111

30. René van Woudenberg and Rik Peels. (2018). “The Metaphysics of Degrees”, European Journal of Philosophy 26.1, 46-65

29. Rik Peels. (2017). “Responsible Belief and Epistemic Justification”, Synthese 194.8, 2895-2915

28. Rik Peels. (2017). “Ten Reasons to Embrace Scientism”, Studies in History and Philosophy of Science A 63, 11-21

27. Rik Peels. (2016). “The Empirical Case against Introspection”, Philosophical Studies 173.9, 2461-2485

26. Rik Peels. (2016). “Is Science like a Crossword Puzzle? Foundherentist Conceptions of Scientific Warrant”, Canadian Journal of Philosophy 46.1, 81-101

25. Rik Peels. (2015). “Let’s Bite the Bullet on Deontological Epistemic Justification: A Response to Robert Lockie”, Social Epistemology Review and Reply Collective 4.12, 42-49

24. Rik Peels. (2015). “Believing at Will Is Possible”, Australasian Journal of Philosophy 93.3, 524-541

Rik Peels. (2015). “Does God Have a Sense of Humor?”, Faith and Philosophy 32.3, 271-292

23. Rik Peels. (2015). “A Modal Solution to the Problem of Moral Luck”, American Philosophical Quarterly 52.1, 73-87

22. Rik Peels. (2014). “Against Doxastic Compatibilism”, Philosophy and Phenomenological Research 89.3, 679-702

21. Rik Peels. (2014). “What Kind of Ignorance Excuses? Two Neglected Issues”, Philosophical Quarterly 64.256, 478-496

20. Rik Peels. (2014). “Hume’s Law Violated?”, Journal of Value Inquiry 48.3, 449-455

19. Rik Peels, Anthony Booth. (2014). “Why Responsible Belief Is Permissible Belief”, Analytic Philosophy 55.1, 75-88

18. Rik Peels. (2014). “Are Naturalism and Moral Realism Incompatible?”, Religious Studies 50.1, 77-86

17. Rik Peels. (2013). “Guest Editor’s Preface: A New Case for Atheism”, Philo 16.1, 5-8.

16 Rik Peels. (2013). “A Bodiless Spirit?”, Philo 16.1, 62-76

15. Rik Peels. (2013). “Does Doxastic Responsibility Entail the Ability to Believe Otherwise?”, Synthese 190.17, 3651-3669

14. Rik Peels. (2013). “Is Omniscience Impossible?”, Religious Studies 49.4, 481-490

13. Rik Peels. (2013). “Belief-Policies Cannot Ground Doxastic Responsibility”, Erkenntnis 78.3, 561-569

12. Rik Peels. (2012). “The New View on Ignorance Undefeated”, Philosophia 40.4, 741-750

11. Anthony Booth, Rik Peels. (2012). “Epistemic Justification, Rights, and Permissibility”, Logos and Episteme 3.3, 405-411 

10. Rik Peels. (2011). “Ignorance Is Lack of True Belief: A Rejoinder to Le Morvan”, Philosophia 39.2, 345-355

9. Rik Peels. (2011). “Sin and Human Cognition of God”, Scottish Journal of Theology 64.4, 390-409

8. Rik Peels. (2011). “Tracing Culpable Ignorance”, Logos and Episteme 2.4, 575-582

7. Rik Peels. (2010). “Epistemic Desiderata and Epistemic Pluralism”, Journal of Philosophical Research 35, 193-207

6. Rik Peels. (2010). “The Effects of Sin Upon Human Moral Cognition”, Journal of Reformed Theology 4.1, 42-69

5. Rik Peels. (2010). “The Ethics of Belief and Christian Faith as Commitment to Assumptions”, Religious Studies 46.1, 97-107

4. Rik Peels. (2010). “What Is Ignorance?” Philosophia 38.1, 57-67

3. Anthony Booth, Rik Peels. (2010). “Why Responsible Belief Is Blameless Belief”, The Journal of Philosophy 107.5, 157-165

2. Rik Peels. (2007). “Doxastic Doubt, Fiducial Doubt, and Christian Faith”, Neue Zeitschrift für Systematische Theologie und Religionsphilosophie 49.2, 183-198

1. Rik Peels. (2006). “Divine Foreknowledge and Eternal Damnation: The Theory of Middle Knowledge as Solution to the Soteriological Problem of Evil”, Neue Zeitschrift für Systematische Theologie und Religionsphilosophie 48.2, 160-175