Philosophical Studies 141 (2):157 - 173 (2008)
|Abstract||It is tempting to think that multi premise closure creates a special class of paradoxes having to do with the accumulation of risks, and that these paradoxes could be escaped by rejecting the principle, while still retaining single premise closure. I argue that single premise deduction is also susceptible to risks. I show that what I take to be the strongest argument for rejecting multi premise closure is also an argument for rejecting single premise closure. Because of the symmetry between the principles, they come as a package: either both will have to be rejected or both will have to be revised.|
|Keywords||closure knowledge deduction risk paradox transfer of warrant inference|
|Categories||categorize this paper)|
|Through your library||Configure|
Similar books and articles
Nicholas Silins (2005). Transmission Failure Failure. Philosophical Studies 126 (1):71 - 102.
Richard Swinburne (1998). The Modal Argument is Not Circular. Faith and Philosophy 15 (3):371 - 372.
John Turri (2008). Practical and Epistemic Justification in Alston's Perceiving God. Faith and Philosophy 25 (3):290 - 299.
Peter van Inwagen (2009). Some Remarks on the Modal Ontological Argument. Philo 12 (2):217-227.
Simon Dierig (2010). The Discrimination Argument Revisited. Erkenntnis 72 (1):73 - 92.
Assaf Sharon & Levi Spectre (2008). Mr. Magoo's Mistake. Philosophical Studies 139 (2):289 - 306.
Dylan Dodd (2012). Evidentialism and Skeptical Arguments. Synthese 189 (2):337-352.
Robert C. Bishop (2006). The Hidden Premise in the Causal Argument for Physicalism. Analysis 66 (289):44-52.
Federico Luzzi (2012). Interest-Relative Invariantism and Knowledge From Ignorance. Pacific Philosophical Quarterly 93 (1):31-42.
Joshua Schechter (2013). Rational Self-Doubt and the Failure of Closure. Philosophical Studies 163 (2):428-452.
Added to index2009-01-28
Total downloads70 ( #14,997 of 722,681 )
Recent downloads (6 months)4 ( #20,265 of 722,681 )
How can I increase my downloads?