David Bourget (Western Ontario)
David Chalmers (ANU, NYU)
Rafael De Clercq
Ezio Di Nucci
Jack Alan Reynolds
Learn more about PhilPapers
Philosophical Perspectives 24 (1):437-464 (2010)
We think of logic as objective. We also think that we are reliable about logic. These views jointly generate a puzzle: How is it that we are reliable about logic? How is it that our logical beliefs match an objective domain of logical fact? This is an instance of a more general challenge to explain our reliability about a priori domains. In this paper, I argue that the nature of this challenge has not been properly understood. I explicate the challenge both in general and for the particular case of logic. I also argue that two seemingly attractive responses – appealing to a faculty of rational insight or to the nature of concept possession – are incapable of answering the challenge.
|Keywords||No keywords specified (fix it)|
|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
Alvin I. Goldman (1986). Epistemology and Cognition. Harvard University Press.
David K. Lewis (1986). On the Plurality of Worlds. Blackwell Publishers.
Timothy Williamson (2007). The Philosophy of Philosophy. Blackwell Pub..
Allan Gibbard (2003). Thinking How to Live. Harvard University Press.
Saul A. Kripke (1982). Wittgenstein on Rules and Private Language. Harvard University Press.
Citations of this work BETA
Jared Warren (forthcoming). Sider on the Epistemology of Structure. Philosophical Studies:1-19.
Robert Carry Osborne (2016). Debunking Rationalist Defenses of Common-Sense Ontology: An Empirical Approach. Review of Philosophy and Psychology 7 (1):197-221.
Justin Clarke-Doane (2014). Moral Epistemology: The Mathematics Analogy. Noûs 48 (2):238-255.
Daniel Crow (forthcoming). Causal Impotence and Evolutionary Influence: Epistemological Challenges for Non-Naturalism. Ethical Theory and Moral Practice:1-17.
Similar books and articles
Joshua Schechter (2013). Could Evolution Explain Our Reliability About Logic? In Tamar Szabo Gendler & John Hawthorne (eds.), Oxford Studies in Epistemology 4. 214.
Justin Clarke-Doane (2012). Morality and Mathematics: The Evolutionary Challenge. Ethics 122 (2):313-340.
Michael Liston (1993). Reliability in Mathematical Physics. Philosophy of Science 60 (1):1-21.
Peter Murphy (2006). Reliability Connections Between Conceivability and Inconceivability. Dialectica 60 (2):195-205.
Nagarjuna G., The Role of Inversion in the Genesis, Development and the Structure of Scientific Knowledge.
Selmer Bringsjord (2010). Meeting Floridi's Challenge to Artificial Intelligence From the Knowledge-Game Test for Self-Consciousness. Metaphilosophy 41 (3):292-312.
William J. Melanson (2011). Reassessing the Epistemological Challenge to Mathematical Platonism. Croatian Journal of Philosophy 11 (3):295-304.
Darrell P. Rowbottom (2008). On the Proximity of the Logical and 'Objective Bayesian' Interpretations of Probability. Erkenntnis 69 (3):335-349.
S. Rahman (ed.) (2004). Logic, Epistemology, and the Unity of Science. Dordrecht, Kluwer.
Joel Pust (2004). On Explaining Knowledge of Necessity. Dialectica 58 (1):71–87.
Marcel Boumans (2004). The Reliability of an Instrument. Social Epistemology 18 (2 & 3):215 – 246.
Folke Tersman (2008). The Reliability of Moral Intuitions: A Challenge From Neuroscience. Australasian Journal of Philosophy 86 (3):389 – 405.
Berislav Žarnić (2011). Prelude to a Socio-Logic of Imperatives. European Journal of Analytic Philosophy 7 (2):6-16.
Added to index2010-10-23
Total downloads206 ( #13,731 of 1,902,168 )
Recent downloads (6 months)20 ( #36,260 of 1,902,168 )
How can I increase my downloads?