Graduate studies at Western
Erkenntnis 73 (1):1 - 17 (2010)
|Abstract||Here I present and defend an etiological theory of objective, doxastic justification, and related theories of defeat and evidence. The theory is intended to solve a problem for reliabilist epistemologies— the problem of identifying relevant environments for assessing a process's reliability. It is also intended to go some way to accommodating, neutralizing, or explaining away many internalist-friendly elements in our epistemic thinking|
|Keywords||No keywords specified (fix it)|
|Categories||categorize this paper)|
|Through your library||Configure|
Similar books and articles
Steven Miller & Marcel Fredericks (2002). Reliabilism 'Naturalized'. Social Epistemology 16 (4):367 – 376.
Justin P. McBrayer (2007). Process Reliabilism, Virtue Reliabilism, and the Value of Knowledge. Southern Journal of Philosophy 45 (2):289-302.
Anthony Brueckner (2009). Internalism and Evidence of Reliability. Philosophia 37 (1):47-54.
Alvin Goldman, Reliabilism. Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy.
Jarrett Leplin (2007). In Defense of Reliabilism. Philosophical Studies 134 (1):31 - 42.
Jonathan Kvanvig (2007). Two Approaches to Epistemic Defeat. In Deane-Peter Baker (ed.), Alvin Plantinga. Cambridge University Press.
Jack Lyons (2013). Should Reliabilists Be Worried About Demon Worlds? Philosophy and Phenomenological Research 86 (1):1-40.
Michael A. Bishop (2010). Why the Generality Problem is Everybody's Problem. Philosophical Studies 151 (2):285 - 298.
David Henderson, Terry Horgan & Matjaž Potrč (2007). Transglobal Evidentialism-Reliabilism. Acta Analytica 22 (4):281-300.
Added to index2010-04-05
Total downloads66 ( #16,730 of 751,988 )
Recent downloads (6 months)3 ( #27,104 of 751,988 )
How can I increase my downloads?