David Bourget (Western Ontario)
David Chalmers (ANU, NYU)
Rafael De Clercq
Ezio Di Nucci
Jack Alan Reynolds
Learn more about PhilPapers
Philosophical Studies 102 (3):227 - 258 (2001)
Reliablists have argued that the important evaluative epistemic concept of being justified in holding a belief, at least to the extent that that concept is associated with knowledge, is best understood as concerned with the objective appropriateness of the processes by which a given belief is generated and sustained. In particular, they hold that a belief is justified only when it is fostered by processes that are reliable (at least minimally so) in the believer’s actual world. Of course, reliablists typically recognize other concepts of justification--typically subjective notions--which are given a noncompeting sort of epistemic legitimacy. However, they have tended to focus on the epistemically central notion of "strong justification," and have come to settle on this familiar reliablist analysis, supposing that it pretty much exhausts what there is to say about "objective justification.".
|Keywords||Philosophy Philosophy Epistemology Logic Philosophy of Mind Philosophy of Religion|
|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
Jack Lyons (2013). Should Reliabilists Be Worried About Demon Worlds? Philosophy and Phenomenological Research 86 (1):1-40.
David Henderson (2008). Testimonial Beliefs and Epistemic Competence. Noûs 42 (2):190–221.
Sarah Wright (2009). The Proper Structure of the Intellectual Virtues. Southern Journal of Philosophy 47 (1):91-112.
Matthew Frise (2014). Speaking Freely: On Free Will and the Epistemology of Testimony. Synthese 191 (7):1587-1603.
Matjaž Potrč & Vojko Strahovnik (2006). Justification in Context. Acta Analytica 20 (9):91-104.
Similar books and articles
David Henderson & Terence Horgan (2000). Iceberg Epistemology. Philosophy and Phenomenological Research 61 (3):497-535.
John L. Pollock (1983). Epistemology and Probability. Noûs 17 (1):65-67.
Richard Swinburne (2001). Epistemic Justification. Oxford University Press.
Jesper Kallestrup (2009). Reliabilist Justification: Basic, Easy, and Brute. [REVIEW] Acta Analytica 24 (3):155-171.
[author unknown] (1982). Synopsis. PSA: Proceedings of the Biennial Meeting of the Philosophy of Science Association 1982:xi-xviii.
Jonathan L. Kvanvig & Christopher Menzel (1990). The Basic Notion of Justification. Philosophical Studies 59 (3):235-261.
Matthias Steup, Epistemology. Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy.
Alexander Bird (2007). Justified Judging. Philosophy and Phenomenological Research 74 (1):81-110.
Added to index2009-01-28
Total downloads36 ( #109,413 of 1,792,026 )
Recent downloads (6 months)2 ( #344,915 of 1,792,026 )
How can I increase my downloads?