Internalism empowered: how to bolster a theory of justification with a direct realist theory of awareness [Book Review]
Graduate studies at Western
Acta Analytica 27 (4):383-408 (2012)
|Abstract||Abstract The debate in the philosophy of perception between direct realists and representationalists should influence the debate in epistemology between internalists and externalists about justification. If direct realists are correct, there are more consciously accessible justifiers for internalists to exploit than externalists think. Internalists can retain their distinctive internalist identity while accepting this widened conception of internalistic justification: even if they welcome the possibility of cognitive access to external facts, their position is still quite distinct from the typical externalist position. To demonstrate this, Alvin Goldman’s critique of internalism is shown to ignore important lessons from the case for direct realism about perception. In particular, it unjustifiably assumes that internalism entails that only facts simultaneous with the justification of a belief can justify the belief. Goldman’s definition of a “justifier” is also inconsistent with the overall guidance conception of epistemology he takes for granted in his critique of internalism. Content Type Journal Article Pages 1-26 DOI 10.1007/s12136-012-0146-4 Authors Benjamin Bayer, Department of Philosophy, Loyola University, New Orleans, 6363 St. Charles Avenue, Box 046, New Orleans, LA 70118, USA Journal Acta Analytica Online ISSN 1874-6349 Print ISSN 0353-5150|
|Keywords||Internalism Externalism Justification Direct realism Representationalism Perception Memory|
|Categories||categorize this paper)|
|Through your library||Configure|
Similar books and articles
John M. DePoe (2012). Bergmann's Dilemma and Internalism's Escape. Acta Analytica 27 (4):409-423.
George Pappas (2006). Access Internalism. Croatian Journal of Philosophy 6 (2):159-169.
Benjamin Bayer (2011). A Role for Abstractionism in a Direct Realist Foundationalism. Synthese 180 (3):357-389.
B. J. C. Madison (2010). Epistemic Internalism. Philosophy Compass 5 (10):840-853.
N. M. L. Nathan (2005). Direct Realism: Proximate Causation and the Missing Object. [REVIEW] Acta Analytica 20 (36):3-6.
Anthony Brueckner (2011). Justification, Internalism, and Cream Cheese. Philosophical Papers 38 (1):13-20.
John Greco (1990). Internalism and Epistemically Responsible Belief. Synthese 85 (2):245 - 277.
James Chase (2001). Is Externalism About Content Inconsistent with Internalism About Justification? Australasian Journal of Philosophy 79 (2):227-46.
Michael Bergmann (2000). Deontology and Defeat. Philosophy and Phenomenological Research 60 (1):87-102.
B. J. C. Madison (2009). On the Compatibility of Epistemic Internalism and Content Externalism. Acta Analytica 24 (3):173-183.
Sven Bernecker (2006). Prospects for Epistemic Compatibilism. Philosophical Studies 130 (1):81-104.
James McBain (2005). Epistemological Practice and the Internalism/Externalism Debate. Facta Philosophica 7 (2):283-291.
William Harper (1998). Papier Mâché Problems in Epistemology: A Defense of Strong Internalism. Synthese 116 (1):27-49.
Peter J. Markie (2009). Justification and Awareness. Philosophical Studies 146 (3):361 - 377.
Thomas M. Crisp (2010). A Dilemma for Internalism? Synthese 174 (3):355 - 366.
Added to index2012-02-06
Total downloads19 ( #71,344 of 739,472 )
Recent downloads (6 months)1 ( #61,778 of 739,472 )
How can I increase my downloads?