Reply to Adams and Clarke

Logos and Episteme 7 (2):221-225 (2016)
  Copy   BIBTEX

Abstract

Here I defend two counterexamples to Nozick’s truth-tracking theory of knowledge from an attack on them by Adams and Clarke. With respect to the first counterexample, Adams and Clarke make the error of judging that my belief counts as knowledge. More demonstrably, with respect to the second counterexample they make the error of thinking that, on Nozick’s method-relativized theory, the method M in question in any given case must be generally reliable.

Author's Profile

Tristan Grøtvedt Haze
University of Melbourne

Analytics

Added to PP
2016-07-08

Downloads
289 (#53,375)

6 months
82 (#48,411)

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?