David Bourget (Western Ontario)
David Chalmers (ANU, NYU)
Rafael De Clercq
Jack Alan Reynolds
Learn more about PhilPapers
Noûs 44 (3):403-432 (2010)
What accounts for how we know that certain rules of reasoning, such as reasoning by Modus Ponens, are valid? If our knowledge of validity must be based on some reasoning, then we seem to be committed to the legitimacy of rule-circular arguments for validity. This paper raises a new difficulty for the rule-circular account of our knowledge of validity. The source of the problem is that, contrary to traditional wisdom, a universal generalization cannot be inferred just on the basis of reasoning about an arbitrary object. I argue in favor of a more sophisticated constraint on reasoning by universal generalization, one which undermines a rule-circular account of our knowledge of validity
|Keywords||rule-circular validity universal generalization|
|Categories||categorize this paper)|
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
George Bealer (2000). A Theory of the a Priori. Pacific Philosophical Quarterly 81 (1):1–30.
Jonathan Bennett (2003). A Philosophical Guide to Conditionals. Oxford University Press.
Max Black (1958). Self-Supporting Inductive Arguments. Journal of Philosophy 55 (17):718-725.
Paul Boghossian (2003). Blind Reasoning. Aristotelian Society Supplementary Volume 77 (1):225–248.
Paul Boghossian (2001). How Are Objective Epistemic Reasons Possible? Philosophical Studies 106 (1-2):340-380.
Citations of this work BETA
David James Barnett (2014). What's the Matter with Epistemic Circularity? Philosophical Studies 171 (2):177-205.
Kevin Scharp (forthcoming). Truth, Revenge, and Internalizability. Erkenntnis:1-49.
David James Barnett (2015). Inferential Justification and the Transparency of Belief. Noûs 49 (3):n/a-n/a.
Similar books and articles
Luis M. Miller (2010). Why a Trade-Off? The Relationship Between the External and Internal Validity of Experiments. Theoria 25 (3):301-321.
Mikkel Gerken (2011). Conceptual Equivocation and Warrant by Reasoning. Australasian Journal of Philosophy 89 (3):381-400.
Douglas Walton (2006). Rules for Reasoning From Knowledge and Lack of Knowledge. Philosophia 34 (3):355-376.
Lydia Patton (2009). Signs, Toy Models, and the A Priori. Studies in History and Philosophy of Science 40 (3):281-289.
Rachel Tillman (2013). Ethical Embodiment and Moral Reasoning: A Challenge to Peter Singer. Hypatia 28 (1):18-31.
Tomis Kapitan (1982). On the Concept of Material Consequence. History and Philosophy of Logic 3 (2):193-211.
Georg Spielthenner (2007). A Logic of Practical Reasoning. Acta Analytica 22 (2):139-153.
Adriano C. T. Rodrigues & Claudio E. M. Banzato (2009). A Logical-Pragmatic Perspective on Validity. Dialogues in Philosophy, Mental and Neuro Sciences 2 (2):40-44.
G. Sartor (2000). Legal Validity as Doxastic Obligation: From Definition to Normativity. [REVIEW] Law and Philosophy 19 (5):585-625.
Matthew William McKeon (2009). A Plea for Logical Objects. Synthese 167 (1):163 - 182.
Added to index2010-07-02
Total downloads169 ( #6,958 of 1,699,546 )
Recent downloads (6 months)23 ( #31,130 of 1,699,546 )
How can I increase my downloads?