Philosophical Quarterly 55 (220):419–436 (2005)
|Abstract||Internalists tend to impose on justification higher-level requirements, according to which a belief is justified only if the subject has a higher-level belief (i.e., a belief about the epistemic credentials of a belief). I offer an error theory that explains the appeal of this requirement: analytically, a belief is not justified if we have a defeater for it, but contingently, it is often the case that to avoid having defeaters, our beliefs must satisfy a higher-level requirement. I respond to the objection that externalists who endorse this error theory will be forced to accept a radical form of scepticism|
|Keywords||No keywords specified (fix it)|
|Through your library||Configure|
Similar books and articles
Peter D. Klein (1983). Real Knowledge. Synthese 55 (2):143 - 164.
Michael Thune (2010). 'Partial Defeaters' and the Epistemology of Disagreement. Philosophical Quarterly 60 (239):355-372.
Franz Huber (2009). Belief and Degrees of Belief. In Franz Huber & Christoph Schmidt-Petri (eds.), Degrees of Belief. Springer.
William P. Alston (1983). What's Wrong with Immediate Knowledge? Synthese 55 (April):73-96.
Arthur L. Stinchcombe (1991). The Conditions of Fruitfulness of Theorizing About Mechanisms in Social Science. Philosophy of the Social Sciences 21 (3):367-388.
Wim de Muijnck (2003). Wide Physical Realization. Inquiry 46 (1):97 – 111.
Donald R. Franceschetti (1999). Of Skyhooks and the Coevolution of Scientific Disciplines. Behavioral and Brain Sciences 22 (5):836-837.
Chris Tucker (2011). No Justified Higher-Level Belief, No Problem. Journal of Philosophical Research 36:283-290.
Harold Kincaid (1988). Supervenience and Explanation. Synthese 77 (November):251-81.
Chris Tucker (2012). Movin' on Up: Higher-Level Requirements and Inferential Justification. Philosophical Studies 157 (3):323-340.
Added to index2009-01-28
Total downloads48 ( #22,379 of 549,065 )
Recent downloads (6 months)4 ( #19,186 of 549,065 )
How can I increase my downloads?