Discussion Notes/Debate, XVII, 3

John Ian K. BOONGALING ABSTRACT: This paper identifies a structural feature of Gettier cases that has received little attention in the literature. In such cases, there is a decisive fact that explains why a subject’s justified true belief fails to constitute knowledge, yet that fact is inaccessible to the subject. By contrast, an evaluator who correctly judges that the subject …

Shlomit WYGODA COHEN ABSTRACT: Kieran Setiya has developed an original and promising version of non-inferential moral epistemology which he calls Reductive Epistemology. While I find Reductive Epistemology to be an attempt in the right direction, it leaves some important questions unanswered. Tackling these questions brings to the surface the intuition underlying the view’s plausibility, but also reveals a significant challenge …

Tyler Dalton MCNABB and Michael DEVITO ABSTRACT: The reductionist and anti-reductionist debate features prominently within the larger canon of literature devoted to the epistemology of testimony. Reductionism is the thesis, roughly, that testimonial knowledge is reducible to some other, more general, form(s) of knowledge. We take anti-reductionism’s thesis to be the denial of reductionism. In this note, we develop an …