Mind 86 (344):555-573 (1977)
|Abstract||The question discussed is whether the conditions for knowledge laid down by externalist or causal theories of knowledge render knowledge claims secure from scepticism of the cartesian kind. a simple account of such conditions encourages an affirmative answer. but such an account proves inadequate and some of the conditions of an adequate account are sketched. once these conditions are introduced, it is argued, knowledge claims appear as open as ever to sceptical challenge. however it is also seen how modest knowledge claims may be upheld, and the conclusion reached is that the type of theory discussed allows us to compromise with scepticism rather than to capitulate|
|Keywords||No keywords specified (fix it)|
|Categories||categorize this paper)|
|Through your library||Configure|
Similar books and articles
Catherine Z. Elgin (1988). The Epistemic Efficacy of Stupidity. Synthese 74 (3):297 - 311.
Gary Ebbs (2005). Why Scepticism About Self-Knowledge is Self-Undermining. Analysis 65 (287):237-244.
Barry Stroud (2000). Understanding Human Knowledge: Philosophical Essays. Oxford University Press.
Sten Olaf Welding (2005). Kann Es Ein Argument für den Skeptizismus Geben? Das Epistemische Problem der Irrtumsmöglichkeit. Journal for General Philosophy of Science 36 (1):107 - 118.
Jason Stanley (2005). Fallibilism and Concessive Knowledge Attributions. Analysis 65 (286):126–131.
Nancy Cartwright & Sophia Efstathiou (2011). Hunting Causes and Using Them: Is There No Bridge From Here to There? International Studies in the Philosophy of Science 25 (3):223 - 241.
Duncan Pritchard (2005). Scepticism, Epistemic Luck, and Epistemic Angst. Australasian Journal of Philosophy 83 (2):185 – 205.
Anthony L. Brueckner (1997). Is Scepticism About Self-Knowledge Incoherent? Analysis 57 (4):287-90.
Added to index2009-01-28
Total downloads5 ( #169,941 of 722,780 )
Recent downloads (6 months)1 ( #60,541 of 722,780 )
How can I increase my downloads?