Episteme:1-20 (forthcoming)

Authors
Kok Yong Lee
National Chung Cheng University
Abstract
To resolve the lottery paradox, the “no-justification account” proposes that one is not justified in believing that one's lottery ticket is a loser. The no-justification account commits to what I call “the Harman-style skepticism”. In reply, proponents of the no-justification account typically downplay the Harman-style skepticism. In this paper, I argue that the no-justification reply to the Harman-style skepticism is untenable. Moreover, I argue that the no-justification account is epistemically ad hoc. My arguments are based on a rather surprising finding that the no-justification account implies that people living in Taiwan typically suffer from the Harman-style skepticism.
Keywords No keywords specified (fix it)
Categories (categorize this paper)
DOI 10.1017/epi.2022.10
Options
Edit this record
Mark as duplicate
Export citation
Find it on Scholar
Request removal from index
Revision history

Download options

PhilArchive copy

 PhilArchive page | Other versions
External links

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

Knowledge and Lotteries.John Hawthorne - 2003 - Oxford, England: Oxford University Press.
The Structure of Empirical Knowledge.Laurence BonJour - 1985 - Cambridge, MA, USA: Harvard University Press.
Epistemology and Cognition.Alvin Ira Goldman - 1986 - Cambridge, MA, USA: Harvard University Press.
Knowledge and Practical Interests.Jason Stanley - 2005 - Oxford University Press.

View all 49 references / Add more references

Citations of this work BETA

No citations found.

Add more citations

Similar books and articles

How to Understand and Solve the Lottery Paradox.Patrick Bondy - 2013 - Logos and Episteme 4 (3):283-292.
Fallibilism and the Lottery Paradox.Baron Reed - 2008 - Proceedings of the Xxii World Congress of Philosophy 53:217-225.
Lotteries and Justification.Christoph Kelp - 2017 - Synthese 194 (4):1233-1244.
The Hardest Paradox for Closure.Martin Smith - forthcoming - Erkenntnis:1-26.
The Lottery Paradox and Our Epistemic Goal.Igor Douven - 2008 - Pacific Philosophical Quarterly 89 (2):204-225.
The Psychological Dimension of the Lottery Paradox.Jennifer Nagel - forthcoming - In Igor Douven (ed.), The Lottery Paradox. Cambridge University Press.
Nelkin on the Lottery Paradox.Igor Douven - 2003 - Philosophical Review 112 (3):395-404.
Nelkin on the Lottery Paradox.Igor Douven - 2003 - Philosophical Review 112 (3):395-404.
A Bitter Pill for Closure.Marvin Backes - 2019 - Synthese 196:3773-3787.

Analytics

Added to PP index
2022-05-12

Total views
97 ( #120,421 of 2,506,053 )

Recent downloads (6 months)
97 ( #7,654 of 2,506,053 )

How can I increase my downloads?

Downloads

My notes