4 found
Order:
See also
William D. Rowley
University of Rochester
William Rowley
University of St. Andrews
  1.  37
    Pick Your Poison: Beg the Question or Embrace Circularity.Kevin McCain & William Rowley - 2014 - International Journal for the Study of Skepticism 4 (2):125-140.
  2.  5
    Pick Your Poison: Beg the Question or Embrace Circularity.Kevin Mccain & William Rowley - 2014 - International Journal for the Study of Skepticism 4 (1):1-16.
    According to Roderick Chisholm, there are three ways of responding to the Problem of the Criterion and they all leave something to be desired. Michael DePaul, Paul Moser, and Earl Conee have each proposed variations of a fourth way of responding to this problem that rely on reflective equilibrium. We argue that these four options for responding to the Problem of the Criterion leave one with a tough choice: accept one of the three that Chisholm describes or DePaul’s reflective equilibrium (...)
    Direct download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   1 citation  
  3.  42
    Evidence of evidence and testimonial reductionism.William Rowley - 2012 - Episteme 9 (4):377-391.
    An objection to reductionism in the epistemology of testimony that is often repeated but rarely defended in detail is that there is not enough positive evidence to provide the non-testimonial, positive reasons reductionism requires. Thus, on pain of testimonial skepticism, reductionism must be rejected. Call this argument the. I will defend reductionism about testimonial evidence against the NEEO by arguing that we typically have non-testimonial positive reasons in the form of evidence about our testifier's evidence. With a higher-level evidence principle (...)
    Direct download (7 more)  
    Translate
     
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   1 citation  
  4.  4
    Pick Your Poison: Beg the Question or Embrace Circularity.Kevin Mccain & William Rowley - 2013 - International Journal for the Study of Skepticism 3 (4).
    According to Roderick Chisholm, there are three ways of responding to the Problem of the Criterion and they all leave something to be desired. Michael DePaul, Paul Moser, and Earl Conee have each proposed variations of a fourth way of responding to this problem that rely on reflective equilibrium. We argue that these four options for responding to the Problem of the Criterion leave one with a tough choice: accept one of the three that Chisholm describes or DePaul’s reflective equilibrium (...)
    Direct download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   1 citation