Graduate studies at Western
Philosophical Studies 133 (3):411-424 (2007)
|Abstract||Descartes held the view that a subject has infallible beliefs about the contents of her thoughts. Here, I first examine a popular contermporary defense of this claim, given by Burge, and find it lacking. I then offer my own defense appealing to a minimal thesis about the compositionality of thoughts. The argument has the virtue of refraining from claims about whether thoughts are “in the head;” thus, it is congenial to both internalists and externalists. The considerations here also illuminate how a subject may have epistemicially priviledged and a priori beliefs about her own thoughts|
|Keywords||No keywords specified (fix it)|
|Categories||categorize this paper)|
|Through your library||Configure|
Similar books and articles
Henry Jackman (2000). Deference and Self-Knowledge. Southwest Philosophy Review 16 (1):171-180.
Aaron Z. Zimmerman (2008). Self-Knowledge: Rationalism Vs. Empiricism. Philosophy Compass 3 (2):325–352.
Huiming Ren (2009). Entitlement to Self-Knowledge and Brute Error. International Journal of Philosophical Studies 17 (4):543 – 562.
Andrew Moon (2012). Warrant Does Entail Truth. Synthese 184 (3):287-297.
Quassim Cassam (2011). Knowing What You Believe. Proceedings of the Aristotelian Society 111 (1pt1):1-23.
Keith Butler (1997). Externalism, Internalism, and Knowledge of Content. Philosophy and Phenomenological Research 57 (4):773-800.
Glen Hoffmann (2011). Two Kinds of A Priori Infallibility. Synthese 181 (2):241-253.
Robin Jeshion (2000). On the Obvious. Philosophy and Phenomenological Research 60 (2):333 - 355.
Robin Jeshion (2000). On the Obvious. Philosophy and Phenomenological Research 60 (2):333-355.
T. Parent (2013). Infallibility Naturalized: Reply to Hoffmann. Dialectica 67 (3):353-358.
Added to index2009-01-28
Total downloads60 ( #19,325 of 740,944 )
Recent downloads (6 months)3 ( #26,533 of 740,944 )
How can I increase my downloads?