Graduate studies at Western
Philosophical Perspectives 13 (s13):137-49 (1999)
|Abstract||What modal relation must a fact bear to a belief in order for this belief to constitute knowledge of that fact? Externalists have proposed various answers, including some that combine externalism with contextualism. We shall find that various forms of externalism share a modal conception of “sensitivity” open to serious objections. Fortunately, the undeniable intuitive attractiveness of this conception can be explained through an easily confused but far preferable notion of “safety.” The denouement of our reflections, finally, will be to show how replacing sensitivity with safety makes it possible to defend plain Moorean common sense against the spurious advantages over it claimed by skeptical, tracking, relevant-alternative, and contextualist accounts.|
|Categories||categorize this paper)|
|Through your library||Configure|
Similar books and articles
Avram Hiller & Ram Neta (2007). Safety and Epistemic Luck. Synthese 158 (3):303 - 313.
Juan Comesaña (2005). Unsafe Knowledge. Synthese 146 (3):395 - 404.
Kelly Becker (2007). Epistemology Modalized. Routledge.
Dani Rabinowitz, &Quot;the Safety Condition for Knowledge&Quot;. Internet Encyclopedia of Philosophy.
Tomas Bogardus (2013). Knowledge Under Threat. Philosophy and Phenomenological Research 86 (1).
David Manley (2007). Safety, Content, Apriority, Self-Knowledge. Journal of Philosophy 104 (8):403-23.
Jonathan Vogel (2007). Subjunctivitis. Philosophical Studies 134 (1):73 - 88.
Jeffrey Roland & Jon Cogburn (2011). Anti-Luck Epistemologies and Necessary Truths. Philosophia 39 (3):547-561.
Peter Murphy (2005). Closure Failures for Safety. Philosophia 33 (1-4):331-334.
Added to index2009-01-28
Total downloads178 ( #2,280 of 739,318 )
Recent downloads (6 months)13 ( #9,220 of 739,318 )
How can I increase my downloads?