Epistemology versus Non-Causal Realism

Synthese 194 (5) (2017)
  Copy   BIBTEX

Abstract

This paper formulates a general epistemological argument against what I call non-causal realism, generalizing domain specific arguments by Benacerraf, Field, and others. First I lay out the background to the argument, making a number of distinctions that are sometimes missed in discussions of epistemological arguments against realism. Then I define the target of the argument—non-causal realism—and argue that any non-causal realist theory, no matter the subject matter, cannot be given a reasonable epistemology and so should be rejected. Finally I discuss and respond to several possible responses to the argument. In addition to clearing up and avoiding numerous misunderstandings of arguments of this kind that are quite common in the literature, this paper aims to present and endorse a rigorous and fully general epistemological argument against realism

Links

PhilArchive



    Upload a copy of this work     Papers currently archived: 80,001

External links

Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server

Through your library

Similar books and articles

What Realism Implies and What it Does Not.Richard Boyd - 1989 - Dialectica 43 (1‐2):5-29.
Realism and Moral Epistemology.Geoffrey Donald Sayre-Mccord - 1986 - Dissertation, University of Pittsburgh
The Causal Argument against Disjunctivism.Michael Sollberger - 2007 - Facta Philosophica 9 (1):245-267.
Can realism be naturalised? Putnam on sense, Commonsense, and the senses.Chistopher Norris - 2000 - Principia: An International Journal of Epistemology 4 (1):89-140.
Moral Realism.Michael Devitt - 2002 - Croatian Journal of Philosophy 2 (1):1-15.

Analytics

Added to PP
2016-01-30

Downloads
408 (#30,856)

6 months
24 (#64,625)

Historical graph of downloads
How can I increase my downloads?

Author's Profile

Jared Warren
Stanford University

Citations of this work

Morality and Mathematics.Justin Clarke-Doane - 2020 - Oxford, England: Oxford University Press.
Debunking arguments.Daniel Z. Korman - 2019 - Philosophy Compass 14 (12):e12638.
Is there a reliability challenge for logic?Joshua Schechter - 2018 - Philosophical Issues 28 (1):325-347.

View all 20 citations / Add more citations

References found in this work

On the Plurality of Worlds.David K. Lewis - 1986 - Malden, Mass.: Wiley-Blackwell.
Counterfactuals.David K. Lewis - 1973 - Malden, Mass.: Blackwell.
Writing the Book of the World.Theodore Sider - 2011 - Oxford, England: Oxford University Press.
On What Matters: Two-Volume Set.Derek Parfit - 2011 - New York: Oxford University Press.

View all 86 references / Add more references