David Bourget (Western Ontario)
David Chalmers (ANU, NYU)
Rafael De Clercq
Ezio Di Nucci
Jack Alan Reynolds
Learn more about PhilPapers
Acta Analytica 23 (1):45-54 (2008)
The purpose of this paper is to refute the widespread view that challenging a knowledge-claim always raises the original standards of justification–a view often associated with contextualism. To that purpose the distinction between undermining and overriding defeaters will be used. Three kinds of challenges will be considered that differ in their degree of specification. In all three kinds of challenges, the rising standards of justification model fails to capture the dialectic of justification in the case of undermining defeaters. At the end, the skeptical challenge will more briefly be given a similar analysis.
|Keywords||Justification Contextualism Overriding and undermining defeaters Skepticism|
|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
Jason Stanley (2005). Knowledge and Practical Interests. Oxford University Press.
John McDowell (1994). Mind and World. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.
David Lewis (1996). Elusive Knowledge. Australasian Journal of Philosophy 74 (4):549 – 567.
Keith DeRose (1995). Solving the Skeptical Problem. Philosophical Review 104 (1):1-52.
Citations of this work BETA
No citations found.
Similar books and articles
Michael Bergmann (2005). Defeaters and Higher-Level Requirements. Philosophical Quarterly 55 (220):419–436.
Michael Williams (1999). Fogelin's Neo-Pyrrhonism. International Journal of Philosophical Studies 7 (2):141 – 158.
Nathan Hanna (2011). Against Phenomenal Conservatism. Acta Analytica 26 (3):213-221.
Guy Politzer & Jean-françois Bonnefon (2006). Two Varieties of Conditionals and Two Kinds of Defeaters Help Reveal Two Fundamental Types of Reasoning. Mind and Language 21 (4):484–503.
Michael Thune (2010). 'Partial Defeaters' and the Epistemology of Disagreement. Philosophical Quarterly 60 (239):355-372.
John Pollock (2001). ``Defeasible Reasoning with Variable Degrees of Justification&Quot. Artificial Intelligence 133:233-282.
Matjaž Potrč & Vojko Strahovnik (2005). Justification in Context. Acta Analytica 20 (2):91-104.
James Cargile (1995). Justification and Misleading Defeaters. Analysis 55 (3):216 - 220.
Thomas Grundmann (2009). Reliabilism and the Problem of Defeaters. Grazer Philosophische Studien 79 (1):65-76.
Added to index2009-01-28
Total downloads33 ( #120,225 of 1,796,243 )
Recent downloads (6 months)4 ( #208,698 of 1,796,243 )
How can I increase my downloads?