Related categories
Siblings:
17 found
Search inside:
(import / add options)   Sort by:
  1. D. Andler (ed.) (1995). Facets of Rationality. Sage Publications.
    Scholars from various philosophical schools of thought, including cultural relativism, hermeneutics, and postmodernism, have recently critiqued rationalism in light of new developments in the cognitive sciences. Each of these new developments set into motion new inquiries in each school philosophical school of thought. Now, in Facets of Rationality, a distinguished team of scholars examines these new inquiries and bring rationality back into the mainstream of the social sciences. The unique feature of this book lies in its multidisciplinary exploration of rational (...)
    Remove from this list | Direct download  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  2. Bruce Aune (2002). Against Moderate Rationalism. Journal of Philosophical Research 27:1-26.
    This paper criticizes the epistemological doctrine of moderate rationalism that has been defended in recent years by such writers as Laurence BonJour, Alvin Plantinga, and George Bealer. It is argued that this new form of rationalism is really no better than the old one and that the key claim common to both---that intuition or rational insight provides a satisfactory basis for a priori knowledge---is untenable. Most of the criticism is directed specifically against Laurence BonJour’s recent “dialectical” defense of the doctrine. (...)
    Remove from this list | Direct download (5 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  3. Bruce Aune (1970). Rationalism, Empiricism, and Pragmatism: An Introduction. New York,Random House.
  4. John Bengson (2013). Experimental Attacks on Intuitions and Answers. Philosophy and Phenomenological Research 86 (3):495-532.
  5. Paul Boghossian (2001). Inference and Insight. [REVIEW] Philosophy and Phenomenological Research 63 (3):633–640.
    Remove from this list | Direct download (8 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  6. Laurence BonJour (1998). In Defense of Pure Reason. Cambridge University Press.
    A comprehensive defence of the rationalist view that insight independent of experience is a genuine basis for knowledge.
    Remove from this list |
    Translate to English
    | Direct download  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  7. Albert Casullo (2000). Is Empiricism Coherent? The Proceedings of the Twentieth World Congress of Philosophy 5:61-74.
    In recent years empiricism has come under attack. Some argue that the view is incoherent and conclude, on that basis, that some knowledge is a priori. Whatever the merits of such arguments against empiricism, they cannot be parlayed into an argument in support of the a priori unless the latter is not open to those arguments. My primary contention is that the a priori is open to the arguments offered against empiricism. Hence, they do not advance the case for the (...)
    Remove from this list | Direct download (3 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  8. Elijah Chudnoff (2013). Intuitive Knowledge. Philosophical Studies 162 (2):359-378.
    In this paper I assume that we have some intuitive knowledge—i.e. beliefs that amount to knowledge because they are based on intuitions. The question I take up is this: given that some intuition makes a belief based on it amount to knowledge, in virtue of what does it do so? We can ask a similar question about perception. That is: given that some perception makes a belief based on it amount to knowledge, in virtue of what does it do so? (...)
    Remove from this list | Direct download (9 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  9. Sinan Dogramaci (2012). Apriority. In Gillian Russell Delia Graff Fara (ed.), The Routledge Companion to Philosophy of Language. Routledge.
    After briefly expositing some fundamental issues in current debates about apriority, I go on to critically examine meaning-based explanations of how we acquire apriori justification.
    Remove from this list |
    Translate to English
    | Direct download  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  10. Tamar Szabó Gendler (2001). Empiricism, Rationalism and the Limits of Justification. [REVIEW] Philosophy and Phenomenological Research 63 (3):641–648.
    Remove from this list | Direct download (8 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  11. Rocco J. Gennaro & Charles Huenemann (eds.) (1999). New Essays on the Rationalists. Oxford University Press.
    This collection presents some of the most vital and original recent writings on Descartes, Spinoza, and Leibniz, the three greatest rationalists of the early modern period. Their work offered brilliant and distinct integrations of science, morals, metaphysics, and religion, which today remain at the center of philosophical discussion. The essays written especially for this volume explore how these three philosophical systems treated matter, substance, human freedom, natural necessity, knowledge, mind, and consciousness. The contributors include some of the most prominent writers (...)
    Remove from this list | Direct download  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  12. Daniel Z. Korman (2014). Debunking Perceptual Beliefs About Ordinary Objects. Philosophers' Imprint 14 (13).
    Debunking arguments are arguments that aim to undermine some range of beliefs by showing that those beliefs are not appropriately connected to their subject matter. Arguments of this sort rear their heads in a wide variety of domains, threatening beliefs about morality, mathematics, logic, color, and the existence of God. Perceptual beliefs about ordinary objects, however, are widely thought to be invulnerable to such arguments. I will show that this is a mistake. I articulate a debunking argument that purports to (...)
    Remove from this list | Direct download (3 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  13. Edwin David Mares (2011). A Priori. Acumen.
    Edwin Mares seeks to make the standard topics and current debates within a priori knowledge, including necessity and certainty, rationalism, empiricism and analyticity, Quine's attack on the a priori, Kantianism, Aristotelianism, mathematical knowledge, moral knowledge, logical knowledge, and philosophical knowledge, accessible to students.
    Remove from this list |
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  14. Peter Murphy (2008). Rewriting the A Priori/A Posteriori Distinction. Journal of Philosophical Research 33:279-284.
    The traditional way of drawing the a priori/a posteriori distinction, bequeathed to us by Kant, leads to overestimating the role that experience plays in justifying ourbeliefs. There is an irony in this: though Kant was in the rationalist camp, his way of drawing the distinction gives an unfair advantage to radical empiricism. I offer an alternative way of drawing the distinction, one that does not bias the rationalist/empiricist debate.
    Remove from this list | Direct download (5 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  15. Christopher Peacocke (2008). Truly Understood. Oxford University Press.
    A theory of understanding -- Truth's role in understanding -- Critique of justificationist and evidential accounts -- Do pragmatist views avoid this critique? -- A realistic account -- How evidence and truth are related -- Three grades of involvement of truth in theories of understanding -- Anchoring -- Next steps -- Reference and reasons -- The main thesis and its location -- Exposition and four argument-types -- Significance and consequences of the main thesis -- The first person as a case (...)
    Remove from this list | Direct download  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  16. Joel Pust (forthcoming). Empirical Evidence for Rationalism? In Darrell Rowbottom & Anthony Booth (eds.), Intuitions. Oxford University Press.
    Moderate rationalism is the view a person's having a rational intuition that p prima facie justifies them in believing that p. It has recently been argued that moderate rationalism requires empirical support and, furthermore, that suitable empirical support would suffice to convince empiricists to abandon their opposition to rationalism. According to one argument, the causal requirement argument, empirical evidence is necessary in order to justify the claim that any actual token belief is based on rational intuition and moderate rationalism requires (...)
    Remove from this list | Direct download  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  17. Joel Pust (2013). Skepticism, Reason and Reidianism. In Albert Casullo & Joshua Thurow (eds.), The A Priori in Philosophy. Oxford University Press. 205.
    The traditional problems of epistemology have often been thought to be properly solved only by the provision of an argument, with premises justified by rational intuition and introspection, for the probable truth of our beliefs in the problematic domains. Following the lead of Thomas Reid, a sizable number of contemporary epistemologists, including many proponents of so-called "Reformed epistemology" regarding religious belief, reject as arbitrary the preferential treatment of reason and introspection implicit in the traditional view of the problems. These "Reidians" (...)
    Remove from this list | Direct download (2 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation