Switch to: References

Add citations

You must login to add citations.
  1. Is It Rational to Reject Expert Consensus?Bryan Frances - 2020 - International Journal for the Study of Skepticism 10 (3-4):325-345.
    Philosophers defend, and often believe, controversial philosophical claims. Since they aren’t clueless, they are usually aware that their views are controversial—on some occasions, the views are definitely in the minority amongst the relevant specialist-experts. In addition, most philosophers are aware that they are not God’s gift to philosophy, since they admit their ability to track truth in philosophy is not extraordinary compared to that of other philosophers. In this paper I argue that in many real-life cases, such beliefs in controversial (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   1 citation  
  • Varieties of Skeptical Invariantism I & II.Christos Kyriacou - 2021 - Philosophy Compass 16 (10):e12739.
    I review proposed skepticisms in recent literature (or skeptical invariantisms, if we understand skepticism semantically), contrast their basic commitments and highlight some of their comparative theoretical attractions and problems. To help set the scene for the discussion, I start with Unger’s (1975) modern classic of global skepticism about knowledge (and justification). I then distinguish three extant categories of skepticism in the recent literature: two non‐traditional and one more traditional. On the non‐traditional side are fallibilist science‐based skepticism (which relaxes thestringencyof the (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   1 citation  
  • Expert Deference About The Epistemic and Its Metaepistemological Significance – Addendum.Michele Palmira - 2020 - Canadian Journal of Philosophy 50 (4):554-554.
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark