Synthese 55 (2):165 - 173 (1983)
This paper discusses the skeptical argument presented by Keith Lehrer in his paper Why Not Scepticism?. It is argued that Lehrer's argument depends on unacceptable premises, and therefore fails to establish the skeptical conclusion. On the other hand, it is also shown that even if the skeptic's opponent (called a dogmatist) knows something, he may be unable to prove this in a way which could convince the skeptic; hence the difficulty of refuting skepticism. The paper also criticises Dretske's attempt to refute skeptical arguments by rejecting the consequence condition for epistemic justification.
|Keywords||No keywords specified (fix it)|
|Categories||categorize this paper)|
References found in this work BETA
No references found.
Citations of this work BETA
No citations found.
Similar books and articles
Internalism About Justification and the Skeptic's Dilemma.Wai-hung Wong - 2009 - Erkenntnis 71 (3):361 - 375.
Fallibilism, Underdetermination, and Skepticism.Anthony Brueckner - 2005 - Philosophy and Phenomenological Research 71 (2):384–391.
Basic Justification and the Moorean Response to the Skeptic.Nicholas Silins - 2008 - In Oxford Studies in Epistemology Volume 2. Oxford University Press.
Added to index2009-01-28
Total downloads54 ( #96,325 of 2,163,726 )
Recent downloads (6 months)5 ( #62,626 of 2,163,726 )
How can I increase my downloads?