Search results for 'Peter Graham Thielke' (try it on Scholar)

1000+ found
Order:
  1.  98
    Peter J. Graham (2011). Perceptual Entitlement and Basic Beliefs. [REVIEW] Philosophical Studies 153 (3):467-475.
    Perceptual entitlement and basic beliefs Content Type Journal Article DOI 10.1007/s11098-010-9603-3 Authors Peter J. Graham, University of California, 900 University Avenue, Riverside, CA USA Journal Philosophical Studies Online ISSN 1573-0883 Print ISSN 0031-8116.
    Direct download (6 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  2. Gordon Graham (1992). Book Review of Information UK 2000 Edited by John Martyn, Peter Vickers and Mary Feeney. [REVIEW] Logos 3 (2):108-108.
    No categories
    Direct download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  3.  74
    Peter A. Graham (2010). Against the Mind Argument. Philosophical Studies 148 (2):273 - 294.
    The Mind Argument is an argument for the incompatibility of indeterminism and anyone's having a choice about anything that happens. Peter van Inwagen rejects the Mind Argument not because he is able to point out the flaw in it, but because he accepts both that determinism is incompatible with anyone's having a choice about anything that happens and that it is possible for someone to have a choice about something that happens. In this paper I first diagnose and clear (...)
    Direct download (4 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   2 citations  
  4. Peter J. Graham (2012). Epistemic Entitlement. Noûs 46 (3):449-482.
  5.  37
    Peter J. Graham (2015). Testimony as Speech Act, Testimony as Source. In Chienkuo Mi, Ernest Sosa & Michael Slote (eds.), Moral and Intellectual Virtues in Western and Chinese Philosophy: The Turn toward Virtue. Routledge 121-144.
  6.  28
    Peter J. Graham (2015). Epistemic Normativity and Social Norms. In David Henderson & John Greco (eds.), Epistemic Evaluation: Purposeful Epistemology. Oxford University Press 247-273.
  7.  24
    Peter J. Graham (2016). Against Actual-World Reliabilism: Epistemically Correct Procedures and Reliably True Outcomes. In Miguel Angel Fernandez (ed.), Performance Epistemology: Foundations and Applications. Oxford University Press
  8.  24
    Peter J. Graham, Megan Stotts, Zachary Bachman & Meredith McFadden (2015). Epistemic Evaluations: Consequences, Costs and Benefits. Social Epistemology Review and Reply Collective 4 (4):7-13.
  9. Peter A. Graham (2010). In Defense of Objectivism About Moral Obligation. Ethics 121 (1):88-115.
    There is a debate in normative ethics about whether or not our moral obligations depend solely on either our evidence concerning, or our beliefs about, the world. Subjectivists maintain that they do and objectivists maintain that they do not. I shall offer some arguments in support of objectivism and respond to the strongest argument for subjectivism. I shall also briefly consider the significance of my discussion to the debate over whether one’s future voluntary actions are relevant to one’s current moral (...)
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   7 citations  
  10. Peter J. Graham (2011). Does Justification Aim at Truth? Canadian Journal of Philosophy 41 (1):51-72.
    Does epistemic justification aim at truth? The vast majority of epistemologists instinctively answer 'Yes'; it's the textbook response. Joseph Cruz and John Pollock surprisingly say no. In 'The Chimerical Appeal of Epistemic Externalism' they argue that justification bears no interesting connection to truth; justification does not even aim at truth. 'Truth is not a very interesting part of our best understanding' of justification (C&P 2004, 137); it has no 'connection to the truth.' A 'truth-aimed ... epistemology is not entitled to (...)
    Direct download (9 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   3 citations  
  11.  89
    Frank Cioffi Obscurantism, G. A. Equality, Keith Graham, Peter Carruthers, Cynthia MacDonald, Paul Snowden, Howard Robinson, David Over, Paul Guyer & Ralph Walker (1990). The Mind Bursary. Mind 99:394.
    Direct download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  12. Peter J. Graham (2014). Functions, Warrant, History. In Abrol Fairweather & Owen Flanagan (eds.), Naturalizing Epistemic Virtue. Cambridge University Press 15-35.
    I hold that epistemic warrant consists in the normal functioning of the belief-forming process when the process has forming true beliefs reliably as an etiological function. Evolution by natural selection is the central source of etiological functions. This leads many to think that on my view warrant requires a history of natural selection. What then about learning? What then about Swampman? Though functions require history, natural selection is not the only source. Self-repair and trial-and-error learning are both sources. Warrant requires (...)
    Direct download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   2 citations  
  13. Peter J. Graham (2006). Liberal Fundamentalism and its Rivals. In Jennifer Lackey & Ernest Sosa (eds.), The Epistemology of Testimony. Oxford 93--115.
    Many hold that perception is a source of epistemically basic (direct) belief: for justification, perceptual beliefs do not need positive inferential support from other justified beliefs, especially from beliefs about one’s current sensory episodes. Perceptual beliefs can, however, be defeated or undermined by other things one believes, and so to be justified in the end there must be no undefeated undermining grounds. Similarly for memory and introspection.1..
    Direct download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   9 citations  
  14. Peter J. Graham (2014). The Function of Perception. In Abrol Fairweather (ed.), Virtue Scientia: Bridges between Virtue Epistemology and Philosophy of Science. Synthese Library 13-31.
    What is the biological function of perception? I hold perception, especially visual perception in humans, has the biological function of accurately representing the environment. Tyler Burge argues this cannot be so in Origins of Objectivity (Oxford, 2010), for accuracy is a semantical relationship and not, as such, a practical matter. Burge also provides a supporting example. I rebut the argument and the example. Accuracy is sometimes also a practical matter if accuracy partly explains how perception contributes to survival and reproduction.
    Direct download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  15. Peter J. Graham (2010). Testimonial Entitlement and the Function of Comprehension. In Duncan Pritchard, Alan Millar & Adrian Haddock (eds.), Social Epistemology. Oxford University Press 148--174.
    Direct download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   5 citations  
  16.  43
    Peter J. Graham (2000). Transferring Knowledge. Noûs 34 (1):131–152.
    Direct download (7 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   16 citations  
  17.  12
    Peter W. Schuhmann, Robert T. Burrus, Preston D. Barber, J. Edward Graham & M. Fara Elikai (2013). Using the Scenario Method to Analyze Cheating Behaviors. Journal of Academic Ethics 11 (1):17-33.
    Using student self-reported cheating admissions and answers from a hypothetical cheating scenario, this paper analyzes the effects of individual and situational factors on potential cheating behavior. Results confirm several conclusions about student factors that are related to cheating. The probability of cheating is associated with younger students, lower GPAs, alcohol consumption, fraternity/sorority membership, and having cheated in high school. Student perceptions of the certainty and severity of punishment appear to have a negative and (...)
    Direct download (7 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   3 citations  
  18. Peter J. Graham (2006). Can Testimony Generate Knowledge? Philosophica 78:105-127.
    Orthodoxy in epistemology maintains that some sources of belief, e.g. perception and introspection, generate knowledge, while others, e.g. testimony and memory, preserve knowledge. An example from Jennifer Lackey B the Schoolteacher case B purports to show that testimony can generate knowledge. It is argued that Lackey's case fails to subvert the orthodox view, for the case does not involve the generation of knowledge by testimony. A modified version of the case does. Lackey's example illustrates the orthodox view; the revised case (...)
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   6 citations  
  19.  35
    Peter J. Graham (2000). Conveying Information. Synthese 123 (3):365-392.
    Direct download (7 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   13 citations  
  20.  87
    Peter J. Graham (1997). What is Testimony? Philosophical Quarterly 47 (187):227-232.
    C.A.J. Coady, in his book Testimony: A Philosophical Study (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1992), offers conditions on an assertion that p to count as testimony. He claims that the assertion that p must be by a competent speaker directed to an audience in need of evidence and it must be evidence that p. I offer examples to show that Coady’s conditions are too strong. Testimony need not be evidence; the speaker need not be competent; and, the statement need not be relevant (...)
    Direct download (8 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   11 citations  
  21. Peter J. Graham (2011). Intelligent Design and Selective History: Two Sources of Purpose and Plan. Oxford Studies in Philosophy of Religion 3:67-88.
  22.  27
    Peter J. Graham (2006). Testimonial Justification: Inferential or Non-Inferential? Philosophical Quarterly 56 (222):84-95.
    Anti-Reductionists hold that beliefs based upon comprehending (both force and content) of tellings are non-inferentially justified. Comprehension as such, like perceptual representation, confers non-inferential justification on belief. Reductionists, on the other hand, reject this. Comprehension as such is not in itself a warrant for belief. Beliefs based on comprehension are justified only if inferentially supported by other things the subject believes. I discuss an argument from Elizabeth Fricker from her ‘Trusting Others in the Sciences: A Priori or Empirical Warrant?’ She (...)
    Direct download (5 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   6 citations  
  23. Peter J. Graham (2004). Metaphysical Libertarianism and the Epistemology of Testimony. American Philosophical Quarterly 41 (1):37-50.
    Reductionism about testimony holds that testimonial warrant or entitlement is just a species of inductive warrant. Anti-Reductionism holds that it is different from inductive but analogous to perceptual or memorial warrant. Perception receives much of its positive epistemic status from being reliably truthconducive in normal conditions. One reason to reject the epistemic analogy is that testimony involves agency – it goes through the will of the speaker – but perception does not. A speaker might always choose to lie or otherwise (...)
    Direct download (4 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   1 citation  
  24.  25
    Peter J. Graham (2006). Testimonial Justification: Inferential or Non-Inferential? Philosophical Quarterly 56 (222):84–95.
    Anti-reductionists hold that beliefs based upon comprehension (of both force and content) of tellings are non-inferentially justified. For reductionists, on the other hand, comprehension as such is not in itself a warrant for belief: beliefs based on it are justified only if inferentially supported by other beliefs. I discuss Elizabeth Fricker's argument that even if anti-reductionism is right in principle, its significance is undercut by the presence of background inferential support: for mature knowledgeable adults, justification from comprehension as such plays (...)
    Direct download (6 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   6 citations  
  25.  73
    Peter A. Graham (2011). Fischer on Blameworthiness and “Ought” Implies “Can”. Social Theory and Practice 37 (1):63-80.
    I argue that Fischer’s attempts to undermine the “Ought” Implies “Can” principle (OIC) fail. I argue both against his construal of the natural motivation for OIC and against his argument for the falsity of OIC. I also consider some attempts to salvage Fischer’s arguments and argue that they can work only if the true moral theory is motive determinative--i.e., it is such that, necessarily, any action performed from a motive which renders one of the blame emotions appropriate is morally impermissible, (...)
    Direct download (4 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   2 citations  
  26.  8
    Peter J. Graham (2014). Against Inferential Reliabilism: Making Origins Matter More. Philosophical Analysis: The Journal of the Korean Society for Analytic Philosophy 15:87-122.
  27.  56
    Peter J. Graham (2007). The Theoretical Diagnosis of Skepticism. Synthese 158 (1):19 - 39.
    Radical skepticism about the external implies that no belief about the external is even prima facie justified. A theoretical reply to skepticism has four stages. First, show which theories of epistemic justification support skeptical doubts (show which theories, given other reasonable assumptions, entail skepticism). Second, show which theories undermine skeptical doubts (show which theories, given other reasonable assumptions, do not support the skeptic’s conclusion). Third, show which of the latter theories (which non-skeptical theory) is correct, and in so doing show (...)
    Direct download (4 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   4 citations  
  28. Peter J. Graham (2010). Theorizing Justification. In Knowledge and Skepticism. MIT Press
    The standard taxonomy of theories of epistemic justification generates four positions from the Foundationalism v. Coherentism and Internalism v. Externalism disputes. I develop a new taxonomy driven by two other distinctions: Fundamentalism v. Non-Fundamentalism and Actual-Result v. Proper-Aim conceptions of epistemic justification. Actual-Result theorists hold that a belief is justified only if, as an actual matter of fact, it is held or formed in a way that makes it more likely than not to be true. Proper-Aim theorists hold that a (...)
    Direct download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   1 citation  
  29.  96
    Peter J. Graham (2000). The Reliability of Testimony. Philosophy and Phenomenological Research 61 (3):695-709.
    Are we entitled or justified in taking the word of others at face value? An affirmative answer to this question is associated with the views of Thomas Reid. Recently, C. A. J. Coady has defended a Reidian view in his impressive and influential book. Testimony: A Philosophical Study. His central and most Oliginal argument for his positions involves reflection upon the practice of giving and accepting reports, of making assertions and relying on the word of others. His argument purports to (...)
    Direct download (6 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   5 citations  
  30. Peter A. Graham (2014). A Sketch of a Theory of Moral Blameworthiness. Philosophy and Phenomenological Research 88 (2):388-409.
    In this paper I sketch an account of moral blame and blameworthiness. I begin by clarifying what I take blame to be and explaining how blameworthiness is to be analyzed in terms of it. I then consider different accounts of the conditions of blameworthiness and, in the end, settle on one according to which a person is blameworthy for φ-ing just in case, in φ-ing, she violates one of a particular class of moral requirements governing the attitudes we bear, and (...)
    Direct download (6 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  31.  22
    Peter Thielke (2015). To Have and to Hold: Intelligible Possession and Kant's Idealism. British Journal for the History of Philosophy 23 (3):502-523.
    While the debate about whether Kant's idealism requires a ‘Two Worlds’ or ‘Two Aspect’ interpretation has reached a seeming impasse, I argue that the account of intelligible possession found in the ‘Doctrine of Right’ provides novel and compelling evidence in favour of an epistemic ‘Two Aspect’ reading of Kant's position.
    Direct download (4 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  32.  86
    Peter A. Graham (2008). A Defense of Local Miracle Compatibilism. Philosophical Studies 140 (1):65 - 82.
    David Lewis has offered a reply to the standard argument for the claim that the truth of determinism is incompatible with anyone’s being able to do otherwise than she in fact does. Helen Beebee has argued that Lewis’s compatibilist strategy is untenable. In this paper I show that one recent attempt to defend Lewis’s view against this argument fails and then go on to offer my own defense of Lewis’s view.
    Direct download (5 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   1 citation  
  33. Peter J. Graham (2008). The Relativist Response to Radical Skepticism. In John Greco (ed.), Oxford Handbook of Skepticism. Oxford University Press
    Translate
     
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   2 citations  
  34. Peter J. Graham (2011). Psychological Capacity and Positive Epistemic Status. In Jill Graper Hernandez (ed.), The New Intuitionism.
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   1 citation  
  35.  2
    Peter Wyer, Zorica Stojanovic, Jonathan A. Shaffer, Mitzy Placencia, Kathleen Klink, Michael J. Fosina, Susan X. Lin, Beth Barron & Ian D. Graham (forthcoming). Combining Training in Knowledge Translation with Quality Improvement Reduced 30-Day Heart Failure Readmissions in a Community Hospital: A Case Study. Journal of Evaluation in Clinical Practice:n/a-n/a.
    No categories
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  36. Peter J. Graham (2015). Review of Miriam Schiefer McCormick: Believing Against the Evidence. [REVIEW] Notre Dame Philosophical Reviews 10 (5):n-m.
  37.  79
    Peter Thielke (2004). Review: Goudeli, Kyriaki, Challenges to German Idealism: Schelling, Fichte and Kant. [REVIEW] Mind 113 (451):548-552.
  38.  71
    Peter A. Graham (2008). The Standard Argument for Blame Incompatibilism. Noûs 42 (4):697-726.
    Direct download (7 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  39.  17
    Peter Thielke (2003). Hume, Kant and the Sea of Illusion. Hume Studies 29 (1):63-88.
  40.  23
    Peter A. Graham (2013). Blame: Its Nature and Norms By D Justin Coates and Neal A. Tognazzini. Analysis 74 (1):ant108.
    Direct download (4 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  41.  34
    Peter Thielke (2001). Discursivity and Causality: Maimon's Challenge to the Second Analogy. Kant-Studien 92 (4):440-463.
  42.  56
    Peter Thielke (2010). Who's Who From Kant to Hegel I: In the Kantian Wake. Philosophy Compass 5 (5):385-397.
    While almost all of Kant's contemporaries agreed that the Critique of Pure Reason effected a philosophically epochal change, there was far less consensus about what precisely Kant's new critical philosophy had brought about. In large part, this uncertainty was a result of a methodological crisis that Kant's work had sparked: the Critique had shown that traditional dogmatic metaphysics was suspect at best, but what new methods needed to be adopted in the wake of Kant's 'Copernican Revolution'? The Critique stood as (...)
    Direct download (6 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  43.  26
    Peter Thielke (2013). Recent Work on Early German Idealism (1781–1801). Journal of the History of Philosophy 51 (2):149-192.
    One of the Key Questions Facing anyone interested in German Idealism concerns the puzzling transition from Kant to Hegel: how, in the course of a mere two decades, did Kant’s critical idealism, with its emphasis on the need to limit reason’s aspirations, come to be replaced by the seemingly boundless Absolute Idealism of the late 1790s and early 1800s? The traditional—though admittedly caricatured—answer follows an appealingly straightforward path from Kant to the idealist triumvirate of Fichte, Schelling, and Hegel. The central (...)
    Direct download (5 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  44.  27
    Peter Thielke (2001). Getting Maimon's Goad: Discursivity, Skepticism, and Fichte's Idealism. Journal of the History of Philosophy 39 (1):101-134.
  45.  4
    Thomas Magnell, Moving Away From A. Local, Tibor R. Machan, Kevin Graham, Sharon Sytsma, Agape Sans Dieu, Jonathan Glover, Harry G. Frankfurt, James Stacey Taylor & Peter Singer (2002). Information for Contributors. Journal of Value Inquiry 36 (3):601-603.
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   1 citation  
  46.  11
    Peter J. Graham (2012). Testimony, Trust, and Social Norms. Abstracta 6 (3):92-116.
    Direct download (3 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  47. Siobhan O'Donnell, Ann Cranney, Mary J. Jacobsen, Ian D. Graham, Annette M. O'Connor & Peter Tugwell (2006). Understanding and Overcoming the Barriers of Implementing Patient Decision Aids in Clinical Practice. Journal of Evaluation in Clinical Practice 12 (2):174-181.
    Direct download (4 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   1 citation  
  48.  49
    Peter J. Graham (1999). Defending Millianism. Mind 108 (431):555-561.
    Millianism is the view that all there is to the meaning of a name is its bearer. In a recent paper Bryan Frances seeks to undercut the traditional argument against Millianism as well as offer a new argument in favor of Millianism. I argue that both endeavors fail.
    Direct download (7 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  49.  39
    Peter Thielke (2006). Fate and the Fortune of the Categories: Kant on the Usurpation and Schematization of Concepts. Inquiry 49 (5):438 – 468.
    In the early steps of the Transcendental Deduction in the Critique of Pure Reason, Kant briefly addresses the threat posed by usurpatory concepts such as 'fate' and 'fortune'. Commentators have largely passed over these remarks, but in this paper I argue that a careful analysis of the reasons why 'fate' and 'fortune' are usurpatory reveals an important point about the relation between the Deduction and the Principles chapters of the Critique. In particular, I argue that 'fate' and 'fortune' are usurpatory (...)
    Direct download (5 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  50.  1
    Peter Thielke (forthcoming). The Spinozistic Path to Skepticism in Advance. Idealistic Studies.
    No categories
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
1 — 50 / 1000