Skip to main content
Log in

What justifies that?

  • Published:
Synthese Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

I clarify and defuse an argument for skepticism about justification with the aid of some results from recent linguistic theory. These considerations illuminate debates about the structure of justification.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Alston W. (1989a). Epistemic justification. Cornell University Press, Ithaca, New York

    Google Scholar 

  • Alston, W. (1989b). Level confusions in epistemology. In Epistemic justification (pp. 153–171). Ithaca: Cornell University Press.

  • Alston, W. (1989c). What’s wrong with immediate knowledge? In Epistemic justification (pp. 57–78). Ithaca: Cornell University Press.

  • Audi R. (1993). The structure of justification. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UK

    Google Scholar 

  • Barnes J. (1990). The toils of scepticism. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, MA

    Google Scholar 

  • BonJour, L. (1978). Can empirical knowledge have a foundation? American Philosophical Quarterly, 15, 1–13.

    Google Scholar 

  • BonJour, L. (1985). The structure of empirical knowledge. Cambridge, Massachusetts: Harvard University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Chisholm R. (1988). Theory of knowledge (3rd ed.). Prentice-Hall, Englewood Cliffs, NJ

    Google Scholar 

  • Embick, D. (1997). Voice and the interfaces of syntax. PhD thesis, University of Pennsylvania.

  • Embick, D. (2000). Participial structures and participial asymmetries MIT Handout.

  • Embick D. (2004). On the structure of resultative participle in english. Linguistic Inquiry, 35, 355–392

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Feldman, R. (2002). Epistemology. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall.

  • Goldman A. (1979). What is justified belief? In G. S. Pappas (Ed.), Justification and knowledge (pp. 1–23). Dordrecht: D. Reidel.

  • Goldman A. (1986). Epistemology and cognition. Cambridge, MA, Harvard University Press

    Google Scholar 

  • Jackson, E. (2005). Pima resultatives. UCLA Handout.

  • Klein, P. (1999). Human knowledge and the infinite regress of reasons. Philosophical Perspectives, 13, 297–325.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kratzer, A. (1994). The event argument and the semantics of voice. Ms.

  • Kratzer, A. (2000) Building statives. In Conathan et al. (Eds.), Proceedings of the Twenty-sixth annual meeting of the Berkeley Linguistics Society (pp. 385–399). Berkeley: University of California, Berkeley Linguistics Society.

  • Marantz A. (2000). Reconstructing the lexical domain with a single generative engine MIT Handout

  • Marvin, T. (2000). Past participles in reduced relatives. Ms.

  • Parsons T. (1990). Events in the semantics of english. Cambridge, MA MIT Press

    Google Scholar 

  • Pryor J. (2000). The skeptic and the dogmatist. Noûs, 34, 517–549

    Google Scholar 

  • Steup, M. (2003). Foundationalism, circularity, and infinitism. Ms.

  • deMena Travis L. (2005a) Passives, states, and roots in Malagasy. AFLA XII handout.

  • deMena Travis L. (2005). States, abilities and accidents. CLA handout.

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Patrick Hawley.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Hawley, P. What justifies that?. Synthese 160, 47–61 (2008). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11229-006-9078-0

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11229-006-9078-0

Keywords

Navigation