Against an Inferentialist Dogma

Synthese 194 (4):1397-1421 (2017)
Download Edit this record How to cite View on PhilPapers
I consider the ‘inferentialist’ thesis that whenever a mental state rationally justifies a belief it is in virtue of inferential relations holding between the contents of the two states. I suggest that no good argument has yet been given for the thesis. I focus in particular on Williamson (2000) and Ginsborg (2011) and show that neither provides us with a reason to deny the plausible idea that experience can provide non-inferential justification for belief. I finish by pointing out some theoretical costs and tensions associated with endorsing inferentialism.
(categorize this paper)
Reprint years
PhilPapers/Archive ID
Upload history
Archival date: 2015-12-19
View other versions
Added to PP index

Total views
498 ( #11,011 of 2,427,278 )

Recent downloads (6 months)
57 ( #13,179 of 2,427,278 )

How can I increase my downloads?

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