Episteme 15 (4):451-462 (2018)

William Roche
Texas Christian University
I argue elsewhere (Roche 2014) that evidence of evidence is evidence under screening-off. Tal and Comesaña (2017) argue that my appeal to screening-off is subject to two objections. They then propose an evidence of evidence thesis involving the notion of a defeater. There is much to learn from their very careful discussion. I argue, though, that their objections fail and that their evidence of evidence thesis is open to counterexample.
Keywords Comesaña  evidence of evidence  No-Defeaters Condition  Screening-Off Condition  Tal  transitivity in evidence
Categories (categorize this paper)
DOI 10.1017/epi.2017.12
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

Studies in the Logic of Confirmation.Carl A. Hempel - 1983 - In Peter Achinstein (ed.), The Concept of Evidence. Oxford University Press. pp. 1-26.

View all 18 references / Add more references

Citations of this work BETA

Add more citations

Similar books and articles


Added to PP index

Total views
347 ( #25,580 of 2,448,513 )

Recent downloads (6 months)
34 ( #20,203 of 2,448,513 )

How can I increase my downloads?


My notes