Tag Archives: evidentialism

AGAINST EPISTEMIC AKRASIA (pages 57-79)

Ioannis TELIOS ABSTRACT: Arguments against epistemic akrasia have been met with counterexamples from the higher-order evidence literature. Here, I present two counterarguments to address these challenges. Firstly, the attitude reclassification argument disentangles reason-responsiveness from the constraints of evidentialism and allows for the adoption of conflicting propositions by coherent doxastic attitudes. Secondly, the failure reclassification argument demystifies the loss of doxastic …

Read More »

EVIDENTIALISTS’ INTERNALIST ARGUMENT FOR PRAGMATISM (pages 427-436)

Tsung-Hsing HO ABSTRACT: A popular evidentialist argument against pragmatism is based on reason internalism: the view that a normative reason for one to φ must be able to guide one in normative deliberation whether to φ. In the case of belief, this argument maintains that, when deliberating whether to believe p, one must deliberate whether p is true. Since pragmatic …

Read More »

EVIDENTIALISM, KNOWLEDGE, AND EVIDENCE POSSESSION (pages 433-449)

Timothy PERRINE ABSTRACT: Evidentialism has shown itself to be an important research program in contemporary epistemology, with evidentialists giving theories of virtually every important topic in epistemology. Nevertheless, at the heart of evidentialism is a handful of concepts, namely evidence, evidence possession, and evidential fit. If evidentialists cannot give us a plausible account of these concepts, then their research program, …

Read More »

EXPLANATORY VIRTUES ARE INDICATIVE OF TRUTH (pages 63-73)

Kevin McCAIN ABSTRACT: In a recent issue of this journal, Miloud Belkoniene challenges explanationist accounts of evidential support in two ways. First, he alleges that there are cases that show explanatory virtues are not linked to the truth of hypotheses. Second, he maintains that attempts to show that explanatoriness is relevant to evidential support because it adds to the resiliency …

Read More »

INTERNALISM, EVIDENTIALISM AND APPEALS TO EXPERT KNOWLEDGE (pages 291-305)

Michael J. SHAFFER ABSTRACT: Given the sheer vastness of the totality of contemporary human knowledge and our individual epistemic finitude it is commonplace for those of us who lack knowledge with respect to some proposition(s) to appeal to experts (those who do have knowledge with respect to that proposition(s)) as an epistemic resource. Of course, much ink has been spilled …

Read More »

WHAT ARE EXPLANATORY VIRTUES INDICATIVE OF? (pages 179-193)

Miloud BELKONIENE ABSTRACT: This paper discusses an assumption on which explanationist accounts of the evidential support relation rely with a focus on McCain’s recent account. Explanationist accounts define the relation of evidential support in terms of relations of best explanation that hold between the evidence a subject possesses and the propositions she believes. Such a definition presupposes that the explanatory …

Read More »

UNDAUNTED EXPLANATIONISM (pages 117-127)

Kevin McCAIN ABSTRACT: Explanationism is a plausible view of epistemic justification according to which justification is a matter of explanatory considerations. Despite its plausibility, explanationism is not without its critics. In a recent issue of this journal T. Ryan Byerly and Kraig Martin have charged that explanationism fails to provide necessary or sufficient conditions for epistemic justification. In this article I …

Read More »

IS THERE ROOM FOR JUSTIFIED BELIEFS WITHOUT EVIDENCE? A CRITICAL ASSESSMENT OF EPISTEMIC EVIDENTIALISM (pages 137-152)

Domingos FARIA ABSTRACT: In the first section of this paper I present epistemic evidentialism and, in the following two sections, I discuss that view with counterexamples. I shall defend that adequately supporting evidence is a necessary, but not a sufficient, condition for epistemic justification. Although we need epistemic elements other than evidence in order to have epistemic justification, there can be …

Read More »

EXPLANATIONISM, SUPER-EXPLANATIONISM, ECCLECTIC EXPLANATIONISM: PERSISTENT PROBLEMS ON BOTH SIDES (pages 201-213)

T. Ryan BYERLY, Kraig MARTIN ABSTRACT: We argue that explanationist views in epistemology continue to face persistent challenges to both their necessity and their sufficiency. This is so despite arguments offered by Kevin McCain in a paper recently published in this journal which attempt to show otherwise. We highlight ways in which McCain’s attempted solutions to problems we had previously raised …

Read More »

IN DEFENSE OF MORAL EVIDENTIALISM (pages 405-427)

Sharon RYAN ABSTRACT: This paper is a defense of moral evidentialism, the view that we have a moral obligation to form the doxastic attitude that is best supported by our evidence. I will argue that two popular arguments against moral evidentialism are weak. I will also argue that our commitments to the moral evaluation of actions require us to take doxastic …

Read More »