David Bourget (Western Ontario)
David Chalmers (ANU, NYU)
Rafael De Clercq
Jack Alan Reynolds
Learn more about PhilPapers
Philosophical Perspectives 24 (1):529-545 (2010)
Open-minded people should endorse dogmatism because of its explanatory power. Dogmatism holds that, in the absence of defeaters, a seeming that P necessarily provides non-inferential justification for P. I show that dogmatism provides an intuitive explanation of four issues concerning non-inferential justification. It is particularly impressive that dogmatism can explain these issues because prominent epistemologists have argued that it can’t address at least two of them. Prominent epistemologists also object that dogmatism is absurdly permissive because it allows a seeming to provide justification even if the seeming was caused in some apparently inappropriate way. I conclude by disarming this objection.
|Keywords||dogmatism phenomenal conservatism speckled hen problem perceptual justification blindsight associative visual agnosia seemings|
|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
Michael Bergmann (2006). Justification Without Awareness: A Defense of Epistemic Externalism. Oxford University Press.
Laurence BonJour & Ernest Sosa (2003). Epistemic Justification: Internalism Vs. Externalism, Foundations Vs. Virtues. Blackwell Pub..
Roderick Chisholm (1942). The Problem of the Speckled Hen. Mind 51 (204):368-373.
Earl Conee & Richard Feldman (2004). Evidentialism. Oxford University Press.
Alvin I. Goldman (2008). Immediate Justification and Process Reliabilism. In Quentin Smith (ed.), Epistemology: New Essays. Oxford University Press. 63--82.
Citations of this work BETA
Peter J. Markie (2013). Rational Intuition and Understanding. Philosophical Studies 163 (1):271-290.
Thomas Grundmann & Joachim Horvath (2013). Thought Experiments and the Problem of Deviant Realizations. Philosophical Studies (3):1-9.
Chris Tucker (2012). Movin' on Up: Higher-Level Requirements and Inferential Justification. Philosophical Studies 157 (3):323-340.
Michael Bergmann (2013). Externalist Justification and the Role of Seemings. Philosophical Studies 166 (1):163-184.
Jona Vance (2014). Emotion and the New Epistemic Challenge From Cognitive Penetrability. Philosophical Studies 169 (2):257-283.
Similar books and articles
Ram Neta (2004). Perceptual Evidence and the New Dogmatism. Philosophical Studies 119 (1-2):199-214.
Crispin Wright (2007). The Perils of Dogmatism. In Nuccetelli & Seay (eds.), Themes from G. E. Moore: New Essays in Epistemology. Oxford University Press.
Ted Poston (2007). Acquaintance and the Problem of the Speckled Hen. Philosophical Studies 132 (2):331 - 346.
Brian Weatherson (2007). The Bayesian and the Dogmatist. Proceedings of the Aristotelian Society 107 (1pt2):169 - 185.
Matthew Kotzen (2012). Silins's Liberalism. Philosophical Studies 159 (1):61-68.
Susanna Siegel (2012). Congnitive Penetrability and Perceptual Justification. Noûs 46 (2):201 - 222.
Adam Leite (2011). Immediate Warrant, Epistemic Responsibility, and Moorean Dogmatism. In Andrew Reisner & Asbjørn Steglich-Petersen (eds.), Reasons for Belief. Cambridge University Press.
Roger White (2006). Problems for Dogmatism. Philosophical Studies 131 (3):525--57.
Added to index2010-08-15
Total downloads179 ( #3,652 of 1,103,048 )
Recent downloads (6 months)24 ( #6,539 of 1,103,048 )
How can I increase my downloads?