|Abstract||William Alston’s argument against Deontological Theories of Epistemic Justification constitutes a classic$and much debated$piece of contemporary epistemology. At the heart of Alston’s argument, however, lies a very simple mistake which, surprisingly, appears to have gone unnoticed in the vast literature now devoted to the argument. After having shown why the standard response to Alston’s argument doesn’t work, we diagnose the mistake and offer a plausible hypothesis as to why it has remained concealed for so long.|
|Keywords||No keywords specified (fix it)|
|Through your library||Only published papers are available at libraries|
Similar books and articles
Friedrich Christoph Doerge (2006). Re-Definition and Alston's 'Illocutionary Acts'. Grazer Philosophische Studien 73 (1):97-111.
Julian Willard (2001). Alston's Epistemology of Religious Belief and the Problem of Religious Diversity. Religious Studies 37 (1):59-74.
Neil Levy (2007). Doxastic Responsibility. Synthese 155 (1):127 - 155.
E. J. Coffman (2009). Does Luck Exclude Control? Australasian Journal of Philosophy 87 (3):499-504.
Matthias Steup (2000). Doxastic Voluntarism and Epistemic Deontology. Acta Analytica 15 (1):25-56.
Ulf Zackariasson (2006). A Problem with Alston's Indirect Analogy-Argument From Religious Experience. Religious Studies 42 (3):329-341.
William Hasker (2010). Alston on the Rationality of Doxastic Practices. Faith and Philosophy 27 (2):205-211.
John Turri (2008). Practical and Epistemic Justification in Alston's Perceiving God. Faith and Philosophy 25 (3):290-299.
John Turri (2008). Practical and Epistemic Justification in Alston's Perceiving God. Faith and Philosophy 25 (3):290 - 299.
Added to index2009-01-28
Total downloads18 ( #68,499 of 556,837 )
Recent downloads (6 months)1 ( #64,847 of 556,837 )
How can I increase my downloads?