Dimensional Reliabilism

Ergo: An Open Access Journal of Philosophy 10 (2023)
  Copy   BIBTEX

Abstract

The paper argues that (i) the notion of epistemic reliability, as it is standardly defined within mainstream epistemology, is a multidimensional concept, and that (ii) paying attention to reliability’s multidimensional nature can significantly expand reliabilism’s purview both in the theoretical and practical domain. Reliabilist theories of knowledge and justification agree that a process is reliable just in case it leads to a ‘sufficiently high preponderance of true over false beliefs.’ Given this straightforward definition, reliability appears to be, and so far has been implicitly treated by epistemologists as, a mono-dimensional concept. Nevertheless, the terminology and formulas that statisticians and computers scientists have developed for assessing the reliability of binary classification processes reveal that for any belief-forming process whose aim is to identify the presence or the absence of some quality ι, there are at least four different interpretations of the above definition. These interpretations correspond to four separate dimensions of reliability: Precision, Negative Predictive Value (NPV), Recall and Specificity. Though epistemologists do not explicitly specify how they interpret the above definition of reliability, due to their main interest in ‘know-that’, their mono-dimensional focus seems to have so far been mainly directed at Precision alone (or, at best, to both Precision and NPV—but without distinguishing between the two). As it transpires, however, the (entirely) neglected dimensions of Recall and Specificity can guide the satisfaction of another important epistemic goal, best captured by the locution ‘know-most/all.’ The upshot is that different epistemic goals call for high levels of reliability along different dimensions (and, often, their combinations too). This observation invites upgrading reliabilism into dimensional reliabilism, according to which assessing whether a process is knowledge-conducive depends on whether it manifests high reliability along the appropriate dimension(s), given the epistemic goal at hand.

Links

PhilArchive



    Upload a copy of this work     Papers currently archived: 91,928

External links

Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server

Through your library

Similar books and articles

Three kinds of reliabilism.Frank Hofmann - 2013 - Philosophical Explorations 16 (1):59 - 80.
Agent reliabilism.John Greco - 1999 - Philosophical Perspectives 13:273-296.
Reliabilism.Alvin Goldman - 2008 - Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy.
Process Reliabilism and Virtue Epistemology.Ernest Sosa - 2016 - In Brian P. McLaughlin & Hilary Kornblith (eds.), Goldman and His Critics. Hoboken, NJ, USA: Wiley. pp. 125–148.
Reliabilist Epistemology.Alvin Goldman & Bob Beddor - 2021 - Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy.
Knowledge and Reliability.Jennifer Nagel - 2016 - In Hilary Kornblith & Brian McLaughlin (eds.), Alvin Goldman and his Critics. Oxford: Blackwell. pp. 237-256.
Reliabilism’s Memory Loss.Matthew Frise - 2021 - Philosophical Quarterly 71 (3):565-585.
A New Paradigm for Epistemology From Reliabilism to Abilism.John Turri - 2016 - Ergo: An Open Access Journal of Philosophy 3.
Infallibility, Error, and Ignorance.Norman Kretzmann - 1991 - Canadian Journal of Philosophy, Supplementary Volume 17 (sup1):159-194.
Against transglobal reliabilism.Peter J. Graham - 2014 - Philosophical Studies 169 (3):525-535.
Two-Stage Reliabilism, Virtue Reliabilism, Dualism and the Problem of Sufficiency.Paul Faulkner - 2013 - Social Epistemology Review and Reply Collective 2 (8):121-138.
Reliabilism—modal, probabilistic or contextualist.Peter Baumann - 2009 - Grazer Philosophische Studien 79 (1):77-89.

Analytics

Added to PP
2023-12-08

Downloads
19 (#799,653)

6 months
19 (#135,370)

Historical graph of downloads
How can I increase my downloads?

Author's Profile

S. Orestis Palermos
Cardiff University

Citations of this work

No citations found.

Add more citations

References found in this work

Origins of Objectivity.Tyler Burge - 2010 - Oxford, GB: Oxford University Press.
Discrimination and perceptual knowledge.Alvin I. Goldman - 1976 - Journal of Philosophy 73 (November):771-791.
The naturalists return.Philip Kitcher - 1992 - Philosophical Review 101 (1):53-114.
The generality problem for reliabilism. E. Conee & R. Feldman - 1998 - Philosophical Studies 89 (1):1-29.
Reliability and Justification.Richard Feldman - 1985 - The Monist 68 (2):159-174.

View all 13 references / Add more references