Reply to Goldman: Cutting Up the One to Save the Five in Epistemology

Episteme 12 (2):145-153 (2015)
Download Edit this record How to cite View on PhilPapers
I argue that Alvin Goldman has failed to save process reliabilism from my critique in earlier work of consequentialist or teleological epistemic theories. First, Goldman misconstrues the nature of my challenge: two of the cases he discusses I never claimed to be counterexamples to process reliabilism. Second, Goldman’s reply to the type of case I actually claimed to be a counterexample to process reliabilism is unsuccessful. He proposes a variety of responses, but all of them either feature an implausible restriction on process types, or fail to rule out cases with the sort of structure that generates the worry, or both.
No keywords specified (fix it)
Reprint years
PhilPapers/Archive ID
Upload history
First archival date: 2014-06-09
Latest version: 3 (2015-08-06)
View other versions
Added to PP index

Total views
574 ( #8,182 of 55,858 )

Recent downloads (6 months)
42 ( #18,461 of 55,858 )

How can I increase my downloads?

Downloads since first upload
This graph includes both downloads from PhilArchive and clicks on external links on PhilPapers.