On the Prospects of an Islamic Externalist Account of Warrant
David Bourget (Western Ontario)
David Chalmers (ANU, NYU)
Rafael De Clercq
Jack Alan Reynolds
Learn more about PhilPapers
In Tymieniecka Anna-Teresa & Muhtaroglu Nazif (eds.), Classic Issues in Islamic Philosophy and Theology Today (Islamic Philosophy and Occidental Phenomenology in Dialogue, vol. 4. Springer (2010)
Alvin Plantinga’s externalist religious epistemology, which incorporates a proper function account of warrant, forms the basis for his standard and extended Aquinas/Calvin models. Respectively, these models show how it could be that Theistic Belief and Christian Belief could be warranted for believers in a properly basic manner. Christianity and Islam share fundamental theses that underlie the plausibility of Plantinga’s models: the Dependency Thesis, the Design Thesis, and the Immediacy Thesis. Accordingly, an Islamic worldview can endorse the truth of the standard A/C model but recommend a uniquely Islamic extension. Thus, there are multiple viable extensions of the standard A/C model. That there are Multiple Viable Extensions of the standard A/C model grounds the Multiple Viable Extensions Objection (MVE): given the truth of the standard A/C model, it is more likely than not that a given extension of it is probably incorrect, thus those who accept some extension of the standard A/C model have a reason to think that model they affirm is incorrect. After considering the plausibility of second-order knowledge states and responding to objections, I conclude that because a uniquely Islamic extension of the standard A/C model advocates a limited second-order awareness condition on knowledge, it is plausible to think that an Islamic model of warrant (and its corresponding Islamic extension) suggests ways in which a satisfactory response to the MVE objection might be formulated.
|Keywords||Philosophy of Religion Epistemology Islamic Philosophy|
|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
No references found.
Citations of this work BETA
No citations found.
Similar books and articles
Keith E. Yandell (2005). Some Reflections on Religious Knowledge. Sophia 44 (1):25-52.
Mikkel Gerken (2013). Internalism and Externalism in the Epistemology of Testimony. Philosophy and Phenomenological Research 87 (3):532-557.
Albert Casullo (2007). What is Entitlement? Acta Analytica 22 (4):267 - 279.
Andrew Chignell (2003). Accidentally True Belief and Warrant. Synthese 137 (3):445 - 458.
Michael Huemer (2005). Logical Properties of Warrant. Philosophical Studies 122 (2):171 - 182.
Mikkel Gerken (2011). Warrant and Action. Synthese 178 (3):529-547.
Marc Alspector-kelly (2006). Knowledge Externalism. Pacific Philosophical Quarterly 87 (3):289–300.
Hamid Vahid (2011). The Concept of Entitlement and its Epistemic Relevance. Pacific Philosophical Quarterly 92 (3):380-399.
Elke Brendel (1999). Coherence Theory of Knowledge: A Gradational Account. [REVIEW] Erkenntnis 50 (2-3):293-307.
James Franklin (1983). Elected Ignorance. [REVIEW] Quadrant 27 (12):91-92.
Joel Pust (2000). Warrant and Analysis. Analysis 60 (1):51–57.
Amir Dastmalchian (2008). Swinburne’s View of the Islamic Revelation. Journal of Shi‘a Islamic Studies 1 (4):95-106.
John Skorupski (2004). Externalism and Self-Governance. Utilitas 16 (1):12-21.
Akeel Bilgrami (1987). An Externalist Account of Psychological Content. Philosophical Topics 15 (1):191-226.
Nicholas Silins (2012). Explaining Perceptual Entitlement. Erkenntnis 76 (2):243-261.
Sorry, there are not enough data points to plot this chart.
Added to index2011-08-23
Recent downloads (6 months)0
How can I increase my downloads?