In Defense of Proper Functionalism: Cognitive Science Takes on Swampman

Synthese 193 (9):2987–3001 (2016)
  Copy   BIBTEX

Abstract

According to proper functionalist theories of warrant, a belief is warranted only if it is formed by cognitive faculties that are properly functioning according to a good, truth-aimed design plan, one that is often thought to be specified either by intentional design or by natural selection. A formidable challenge to proper functionalist theories is the Swampman objection, according to which there are scenarios involving creatures who have warranted beliefs but whose cognitive faculties are not properly functioning, or are poorly designed, or are not aimed at truth. In this paper, we draw lessons from cognitive science in order to develop a novel argument for the conclusion that the Swampman objection fails against proper functionalist theories of warrant. Our argument not only shows that the underlying, central intuition motivating Swampman-like scenarios is false but also motivates proper function as a necessary condition for warrant, thereby lending support to the claim that any theory of knowledge that lacks a proper function requirement is false.

Author Profiles

Kenneth Boyce
University of Missouri, Columbia
Andrew Moon
Virginia Commonwealth University

Analytics

Added to PP
2015-09-22

Downloads
1,027 (#6,179)

6 months
164 (#3,081)

Historical graph of downloads since first upload
This graph includes both downloads from PhilArchive and clicks on external links on PhilPapers.
How can I increase my downloads?