50 found
Sort by:
  1. Ram Neta (ed.) (2014). Current Controversies in Epistemology. Routledge.

    Epistemology is one of the oldest, yet still one of the most active, areas of philosophical research today. There currently exists many annotated tomes of primary sources, and a handful of single-authored introductions to the field, but there is no book that captures epistemology’s dynamic growth and lively debates for a student audience. In this volume, eight leading philosophers debate four topics central to recent research in epistemology:

    • The A Priori: C. S. I. Jenkins and Michael Devitt
    • (...)

    Ram Neta’s introduction to the volume, descriptions of each chapter, annotated bibliographies for each controversy, and supplemental guide to further controversies in epistemology (with bibliographies) help provide clearer and richer views of active controversies for all readers.

    . (shrink)
    No categories
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  2. Ram Neta (2013). 6. Easy Knowledge, Transmission Failure, and Empiricism. Oxford Studies in Epistemology 4:166.
    No categories
    Direct download  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  3. Ram Neta (2013). Knowing From the Armchair That Our Intuitions Are Reliable. The Monist 95 (2):329-351.
    In recent years, a growing body of experimental literature has called into question the reliability of our intuitions about hypothetical cases, and thereby called into question the use of intuitions in philosophy. In this paper, I critically assess one prominent example of this challenge, namely, Swain, Alexander, and Weinberg’s recent study of order effects on the Truetemp intuition. I argue that the very data that Swain,Alexander, and Weinberg find do not undermine, but instead support, the reliability of intuition. I also (...)
    Direct download (5 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  4. Ram Neta (2013). What is an Inference? Philosophical Issues 23 (1):388-407.
    No categories
    Direct download (5 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  5. Ram Neta (ed.) (2012). Epistemology: Critical Concepts in Philosophy. Routledge.
    For those working in Epistemology dizzying questions such as the following arise: • When are beliefs rational, or justified? • How should we update our beliefs in the light of new evidence? • Is it possible to gain knowledge, or justification? • How do we know what we know, and why do we care about whether—and what—others know? • How can the exploration of pre-Socratic philosophical questions about knowledge assist with the design of twenty-first-century computer interfaces? Addressing the need for (...)
    No categories
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  6. Ram Neta (2012). Review of Knowledge and Practical Interests. [REVIEW] Philosophical Review 121 (2):298-301.
    Direct download (6 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  7. Ram Neta (2012). Knowledge and Practical Interests. Philosophical Review 121 (2):298-301.
    No categories
    Direct download (5 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  8. Ram Neta (2012). Knowledge in an Uncertain World. By Jeremy Fantl and Matthew McGrath. (New York: Oxford UP, 2009. Pp. Xxi + 251. Price US$60.00.). [REVIEW] Philosophical Quarterly 62 (246):211-215.
    No categories
    Direct download (6 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  9. Ram Neta (2012). The Case Against Purity. [REVIEW] Philosophy and Phenomenological Research 85 (2):456-464.
    Direct download (9 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  10. Ram Neta (2011). A Refutation of Cartesian Fallibilism. Noûs 45 (4):658-695.
    According to a doctrine that I call “Cartesianism”, knowledge – at least the sort of knowledge that inquirers possess – requires having a reason for belief that is reflectively accessible as such. I show that Cartesianism, in conjunction with some plausible and widely accepted principles, entails the negation of a popular version of Fallibilism. I then defend the resulting Cartesian Infallibilist position against popular objections. My conclusion is that if Cartesianism is true, then Descartes was right about this much: for (...)
    No categories
    Direct download (6 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  11. Ram Neta (2011). Reflections on Reflective Knowledge. Philosophical Studies 153 (1):3 - 17.
    In his volume reflective knowledge, Ernest Sosa offers an account of knowledge, an argument against internalist foundationalism, and a solution to the problem of easy knowledge. This paper offers challenges to Sosa on each of those three things.
    Direct download (6 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  12. Ram Neta (2010). Can a Priori Entitlement Be Preserved by Testimony. In Adrian Haddock, Alan Millar & Duncan Pritchard (eds.), Social Epistemology. Oxford University Press, Usa. 194--215.
  13. Ram Neta (2010). Liberalism and Conservatism in the Epistemology of Perceptual Belief. Australasian Journal of Philosophy 88 (4):685-705.
    Liberals claim that some perceptual experiences give us immediate justification for certain perceptual beliefs. Conservatives claim that the justification that perceptual experiences give us for those perceptual beliefs is mediated by our background beliefs. In his recent paper ?Basic Justification and the Moorean Response to the Skeptic?, Nico Silins successfully argues for a non-Moorean version of Liberalism. But Silins's defence of non-Moorean Liberalism leaves us with a puzzle: why is it that a necessary condition for our perceptual experiences to justify (...)
    Direct download (5 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  14. Ram Neta (2010). Should We Swap Internal Foundations for Virtues? Crítica 42 (125):63 - 76.
    Internalist foundationalism was popular through much of the history of Western epistemology, but has been subjected to intense critical scrutiny in the last century. Ernest Sosa's new book presents some novel and seemingly powerful arguments against internalist foundationalism. After laying out these arguments, I attempt to rebut them. I argue that Sosa does not, after all, give us good reason for abandoning internalist foundationalism. El fundacionismo internista ha sido muy popular a lo largo de la historia de la epistemología occidental, (...)
    No categories
    Direct download (3 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  15. Ram Neta (2009). Causal Theories of Knowledge and Perception. In Helen Beebee, Christopher Hitchcock & Peter Menzies (eds.), The Oxford Handbook of Causation. Oup Oxford.
    No categories
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  16. Ram Neta (2009). D Efeating the Dogma of Defeasibility. In Patrick Greenough, Duncan Pritchard & Timothy Williamson (eds.), Williamson on Knowledge. Oxford University Press. 161--82.
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  17. Ram Neta (2009). Empiricism About Experience. [REVIEW] Philosophy and Phenomenological Research 79 (2):482-489.
    According to Gupta, there is a difficulty facing any attempt to answer this question. The difficulty has to do with the following phenomenon. The impact that any particular experience has on what the experiencing subject is entitled to believe will depend upon the concepts, conceptions, and beliefs – in short, upon the view – that the experiencing subject is entitled to hold when she has that experience.1 But what view she was entitled to hold when she had that experience depends (...)
    Direct download (9 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  18. Ram Neta (2009). Mature Human Knowledge as a Standing in the Space of Reasons. Philosophical Topics 37 (1):115-132.
    This quoted passage makes a negative claim – a claim about what we are not doing when we characterize an episode or state as that of knowing – and it also makes a positive claim – a claim about what we are doing when we characterize an episode or state as that of knowing. Although McDowell has not endorsed the negative claim, he has repeatedly and explicitly endorsed the positive claim, i.e., that “in characterizing an episode or a state as (...)
    Direct download (5 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  19. Ram Neta (2009). Treating Something as a Reason for Action. Noûs 43 (4):684-699.
    Direct download (7 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  20. Ram Neta & Duncan Pritchard (eds.) (2009). Arguing About Knowledge. Routledge.
    General introduction -- What is knowledge? -- What is the value of knowledge? -- What evidence do we have? -- How should we distribute our confidence? -- What is it to be justified in believing something? -- What is the structure of justification and knowledge? -- What is the nature of the epistemic 'ought'? -- What are the sources of knowledge? -- What can we know? -- Is knowledge in the eye of the beholder?
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  21. Ram Neta (2008). What Evidence Do You Have? British Journal for the Philosophy of Science 59 (1):89-119.
    Your evidence constrains your rational degrees of confidence both locally and globally. On the one hand, particular bits of evidence can boost or diminish your rational degree of confidence in various hypotheses, relative to your background information. On the other hand, epistemic rationality requires that, for any hypothesis h, your confidence in h is proportional to the support that h receives from your total evidence. Why is it that your evidence has these two epistemic powers? I argue that various proposed (...)
    Direct download (8 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  22. Ram Neta (2008). How Cheap Can You Get? Philosophical Issues 18 (1):130-142.
    According to a contextualist account of knowledge ascriptions, it’s possible for both Skeptic’s assertion of “Moore doesn’t know (at a particular time t0) that he has hands” and Normal’s simultaneous assertion of “Moore does know (at t0) that he has hands” to be true, so long as these assertions are issued in different contexts. That’s because the truth-conditions of such knowledge ascriptions (or denials) are fixed partly by features of the context in which those ascriptions (or denials) are issued.
    Direct download (6 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  23. Ram Neta (2008). How to Naturalize Epistemology. In Vincent Hendricks (ed.), New Waves in Epistemology. Palgrave Macmillan. 324--353.
    Since the publication of W.V. Quine’s “Epistemology Naturalized”1, a growing number of self-described “naturalist” epistemologists have come to hold a particular view of what epistemology can and ought to be. In order to articulate this naturalist view, let me begin by describing the epistemological work that the naturalist tends to criticize – a motley that I will refer to collectively as “non-naturalist epistemology”. I will describe this motley in terms that are designed to capture the naturalist’s discontentment with it, as (...)
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  24. Ram Neta (2008). In Defense of Disjunctivism. In Fiona Macpherson & Adrian Haddock (eds.), Disjunctivism: Perception, Action, Knowledge. Oxford University Press. 311--29.
    Right now, I see a computer in front of me. Now, according to current philosophical orthodoxy, I could have the very same perceptual experience that I’m having right now even if I were not seeing a computer in front of me. Indeed, such orthodoxy tells us, I could have the very same experience that I’m having right now even if I were not seeing anything at all in front of me, but simply suffering from a hallucination. More generally, someone can (...)
    Direct download  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  25. Ram Neta (2008). Review of Ernest Sosa, A Virtue Epistemology: Apt Belief and Reflective Knowledge, Volume 1. [REVIEW] Notre Dame Philosophical Reviews 2008 (5).
    Direct download  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  26. Ram Neta (2008). The Nature and Reach of Privileged Access. In Anthony E. Hatzimoysis (ed.), Self-Knowledge. Oxford University Press.
    Many philosophers accept a “privileged access” thesis concerning our own present mental states and mental events. According to these philosophers, if I am in mental state (or undergoing mental event) M, then – at least in many cases – I have privileged access to the fact that I am in (or undergoing) M. For instance, if I now believe that my cat is sitting on my lap, then (in normal circumstances) I have privileged access to the fact that I now (...)
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  27. Ram Neta (2008). Undermining the Case for Contrastivism. Social Epistemology 22 (3):289 – 304.
    A number of philosophers have recently defended “contrastivist” theories of knowledge, according to which knowledge is a relation between at least the following three relata: a knower, a proposition, and a contrast set. I examine six arguments that Jonathan Schaffer has given for this thesis, and show that those arguments do not favour contrastivism over a rival view that I call “evidentiary relativism”. I then argue that evidentiary relativism accounts for more data than does contrastivism.
    Direct download (5 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  28. Ram Neta & Duncan Pritchard (2008). Introduction to Part Six. In Duncan Pritchard & Ram Neta (eds.), Arguing About Knowledge. Routledge. 211.
    No categories
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  29. Ram Neta & Duncan Pritchard (eds.) (2008). Arguing About Knowledge. Routledge.
    General introduction -- Part one: What is knowledge? -- Part two: What is the value of knowledge? -- Part three: What evidence do we have? -- Part four: How should we distribute our confidence? -- Part five: What is it to be justified in believing something? -- Part six: What is the structure of justification and knowledge? -- Part seven: What is the nature of the epistemic thought? -- Part eight: What are the sources of knowledge? -- Part nine: What (...)
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  30. Avram Hiller & Ram Neta (2007). Safety and Epistemic Luck. Synthese 158 (3):303 - 313.
    There is some consensus that for S to know that p, it cannot be merely a matter of luck that S’s belief that p is true. This consideration has led Duncan Pritchard and others to propose a safety condition on knowledge. In this paper, we argue that the safety condition is not a proper formulation of the intuition that knowledge excludes luck. We suggest an alternative proposal in the same spirit as safety, and find it lacking as well.
    Direct download (6 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  31. Ram Neta (2007). Anti-Intellectualism and the Knowledge-Action Principle. [REVIEW] Philosophy and Phenomenological Research 75 (1):180–187.
    No categories
    Direct download (9 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  32. Ram Neta (2007). Contextualism and a Puzzle About Seeing. Philosophical Studies 134 (1):53-63.
    Contextualist solutions to skeptical puzzles have recently been subjected to various criticisms. In this paper, I will defend contextualism against an objection prominently pressed by Stanley 2000. According to Stanley, contextualism in epistemology advances an empirically implausible hypothesis about the semantics of knowledge ascriptions in natural language. It is empirically implausible because it attributes to knowledge ascriptions a kind of semantic context-sensitivity that is wholly unlike any well- established type of semantic context-sensitivity in natural language.
    Direct download (8 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  33. Ram Neta (2007). Fixing the Transmission: The New Mooreans. In Susana Nuccetelli & Gary Seay (eds.), Themes From G. E. Moore: New Essays in Epistemology and Ethics. Clarendon Press.
  34. Ram Neta (2007). In Defense of Epistemic Relativism. Episteme 4 (1):30-48.
    In Fear of Knowledge, Paul Boghossian argues against various forms of epistemic relativism. In this paper, I criticize Boghossian’s arguments against a particular variety of relativism. I then argue in favor of a thesis that is very similar to this variety of relativism.
    Direct download (8 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  35. Ram Neta (2007). Propositional Justification, Evidence, and the Cost of Error. Philosophical Issues 17 (1):197–216.
    My topic in this paper is a particular species of epistemic justification – a species that, following Roderick Firth, I call “propositional justification.”1 Propositional justification is a relation between a person and a proposition. I will say that for S to bear the propositional justification relation to p is for S to be “justified in believing” that p. What is propositional justification? What is it for S to be justified in believing that p? Here’s my answer.
    Direct download (9 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  36. Ram Neta (2007). Reply to Gallimore. Philosophical Studies 134 (1):71 - 72.
    No categories
    Direct download (5 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  37. Ram Neta & Duncan Pritchard (2007). McDowell and the New Evil Genius. Philosophy and Phenomenological Research 74 (2):381–396.
    (NEG) is widely accepted both by internalist and by externalists. In fact, there have been very few opponents of (NEG). Timothy Williamson (e.g., 2000) rejects (NEG), for reasons that have by now received a great deal of scrutiny.2 John McDowell also rejects (NEG), but his reasons have not received the scrutiny they deserve. This is in large part because those reasons have not been well understood. We believe that McDowell’s challenge to (NEG) is important, worthy of fair assessment, and maybe (...)
    Direct download (10 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  38. Ram Neta (2006). Epistemology Factualized: New Contractarian Foundations for Epistemology. Synthese 150 (2):247 - 280.
    Many epistemologists are interested in offering a positive account of how it is that many of our common sense beliefs enjoy one or another positive epistemological status (e.g., how they are warranted, justified, reasonable, or what have you). A number of philosophers, under the influence of Wittgenstein and/or J. L. Austin, have argued that this enterprise is misconceived. The most effective version of this argument is to be found in Mark Kaplan’s paper “Epistemology on Holiday”. After explaining what this criticism (...)
    Direct download (5 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  39. Ram Neta (2005). A Contextualist Solution to the Problem of Easy Knowledge. Grazer Philosophische Studien 69 (1):183-206.
    Many philosophers hold some verion of the doctrine of "basic knowledge". According to this doctrine, it's possible for S to know that p, even if S doesn't know the source of her knowledge that p to be reliable or trustworthy. Stewart Cohen has recently argued that this doctrine confronts the problem of easy knowledge. I defend basic knowledge against this criticism, by providing a contextualist solution to the problem of easy knowledge.
    Direct download  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  40. Ram Neta (2004). On the Normative Significance of Brute Facts. Legal Theory 10 (3):199-214.
    Direct download (7 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  41. Ram Neta (2004). Perceptual Evidence and the New Dogmatism. Philosophical Studies 119 (1-2):199-214.
    What is the epistemological value of perceptual experience? In his recently influential paper, “The Skeptic and the Dogmatist”1, James Pryor develops a seemingly plausible answer to this question. Pryor’s answer comprises the following three theses: (F) “Our perceptual justification for beliefs about our surroundings is always defeasible – there are always possible improvements in our epistemic state which would no longer support those beliefs.” (517) (PK) “This justification that you get merely by having an experience as of p can sometimes (...)
    Direct download (7 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  42. Ram Neta (2004). Review of Christopher Peacocke, The Realm of Reason. [REVIEW] Notre Dame Philosophical Reviews 2004 (10).
    No categories
    Direct download  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  43. Ram Neta (2004). Skepticism, Abductivism, and the Explanatory Gap. Philosophical Perspectives 14 (1):296-325.
  44. Ram Neta & Guy Rohrbaugh (2004). Luminosity and the Safety of Knowledge. Pacific Philosophical Quarterly 85 (4):396–406.
    In his recent Knowledge and its Limits, Timothy Williamson argues that no non-trivial mental state is such that being in that state suffices for one to be in a position to know that one is in it. In short, there are no “luminous” mental states. His argument depends on a “safety” requirement on knowledge, that one’s confident belief could not easily have been wrong if it is to count as knowledge. We argue that the safety requirement is ambiguous; on one (...)
    Direct download (6 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  45. Ram Neta (2003). Contextualism and the Problem of the External World. Philosophy and Phenomenological Research 66 (1):1–31.
    A skeptic claims that I do not have knowledge of the external world. It has been thought that the skeptic reaches this conclusion because she employs unusually stringent standards for knowledge. But the skeptic does not employ unusually high standards for knowledge. Rather, she employs unusually restrictive standards of evidence. Thus, her claim that we lack knowledge of the external world is supported by considerations that would equally support the claim that we lack evidence for our beliefs about the external (...)
    Direct download (10 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  46. Ram Neta (2003). Skepticism, Contextualism, and Semantic Self-Knowledge. Philosophy and Phenomenological Research 67 (2):396–411.
    Stephen Schiffer has argued that contextualist solutions to skepticism rest on an implausible "error theory" concerning our own semantic intentions. Similar arguments have recently been offered also by Thomas Hofweber and Patrick Rysiew. I attempt to show how contextualists can rebut these arguments. The kind of self-knowledge that contextualists are committed to denying us is not a kind of self-knowledge that we need, nor is it a kind of self-knowledge that we can plausibly be thought to possess.
    Direct download (8 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  47. Ram Neta (2002). S Knows That P. Noûs 36 (4):663–681.
    Rieber 1998 proposes an account of "S knows that p" that generates a contextualist solution to Closure. In this paper, I’ll argue that Rieber’s account of "S knows that p" is subject to fatal objections, but we can modify it to achieve an adequate account of "S knows that p" that generates a unified contextualist solution to all four puzzles. This is a feat that should matter to those philosophers who have proposed contextualist solutions to Closure: all of them (...)
    Direct download (7 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  48. Alan Nelson, Ram Neta, Nelson Pike & Mark van Roojen (1999). The Fourth Meditation1. Philosophy and Phenomenological Research 59 (3):559-591.
    No categories
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  49. Ram Neta (1998). How Can There Be Semantic Facts? Southwest Philosophy Review 14 (1):25-30.
    No categories
    Direct download (4 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  50. Ram Neta (1997). Stroud and Moore on Skepticism. Southwest Philosophy Review 13 (1):83-89.
    Direct download (4 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation