Indicator Reliabilism
Bibliographic Data
| ID | 10345783 |
|---|---|
| Authors | James Chase (0000-0001-6033-7885, University of Tasmania, corresponding author) |
| Year | 2004 |
| Volume | 69 |
| Issue | 1 |
| Pages | 115-137 |
| Publication date | 2004-07-01 |
| Open Access | Yes |
| Type | ARTICLE |
| Venue | Philosophy and Phenomenological Research (JOURNAL) |
| Journal identifiers | ISSN: 0031-8205 • E-ISSN: 1933-1592 |
| Publisher | Wiley (PUBLISHER • GB) |
| DOI | 10.1111/j.1933-1592.2004.tb00386.x |
| OpenAlex | W4244221382 |
| Language | EN |
| Citations received | 2 |
| References cited | 9 |
In ‘Epistemic Folkways and Scientific Epistemology’Goldman offers a theory of justification inspired by the exemplar account of concept representation. I discuss the connection and conclude that the analogy does not support the theory offered. I then argue that Goldman's rule consequentialist framework for analysis is vulnerable to a problem of epistemic access, and use this to present an analysis of justification as an indicator concept we use to track how well the evaluated agent is doing with respect to the primary epistemic norm of believing truths and not falsehoods. A theory of justification along these lines is then given, and its prospects of handling the evil demon objection to reliabilism are assessed
Analogy · Demon · Epistemology · Norm (philosophy · Representation (politics · Epistemology, Ethics, and Metaphysics · Philosophy · Philosophy and History of Science · Philosophy and Theoretical Science
| Citations per year | 0.12 |
|---|---|
| Citation span | 2009 - 2023 (15) |
| Highly cited | No |