Regarding a Regress

Pacific Philosophical Quarterly 94 (3):358-388 (2013)
Is there a successful regress argument against intellectualism? In this article I defend the negative answer. I begin by defending Stanley and Williamson's (2001) critique of the contemplation regress against Noë (2005). I then identify a new argument – the employment regress – that is designed to succeed where the contemplation regress fails, and which I take to be the most basic and plausible form of a regress argument against intellectualism. However, I argue that the employment regress still fails. Drawing on the previous discussion, I criticise further regress arguments given by Hetherington (2006) and Noë (2005)
Keywords Knowledge How  Ryle  Knowledge That  Intellectualism  Regress
Categories (categorize this paper)
DOI 10.1111/papq.12004
 Save to my reading list
Follow the author(s)
My bibliography
Export citation
Find it on Scholar
Edit this record
Mark as duplicate
Revision history Request removal from index
Download options
PhilPapers Archive Yuri Cath, Regarding a Regress
External links
Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server
Configure custom proxy (use this if your affiliation does not provide a proxy)
Through your library
References found in this work BETA
Jason Stanley (2011). Know How. Oxford University Press.
Stephen P. Stich (1978). Beliefs and Subdoxastic States. Philosophy of Science 45 (December):499-518.

View all 16 references / Add more references

Citations of this work BETA
J. Adam Carter & Duncan Pritchard (2015). Knowledge-How and Epistemic Value. Australasian Journal of Philosophy 93 (4):799-816.

Add more citations

Similar books and articles

Monthly downloads

Added to index


Total downloads

147 ( #15,336 of 1,726,249 )

Recent downloads (6 months)

43 ( #27,203 of 1,726,249 )

How can I increase my downloads?

My notes
Sign in to use this feature

Start a new thread
There  are no threads in this forum
Nothing in this forum yet.