Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-t7czq Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-28T14:18:08.184Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Recognizing Levels of Justification: To Add or to Subtract

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  21 October 2019

Richard Fumerton
Richard Fumerton*
Affiliation:
University of Iowa, Iowa City, IA, USA
*
*Email: [email protected]
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

In this paper I explore the idea of developing something like Sosa's influential distinction between cognitio and scientia (animal knowledge and reflective knowledge) to epistemic justification. On the assumption that we should, I explore the question of whether we should do so by either (1) beginning with a really basic, intellectually undemanding kind of justification, recognizing more sophisticated intellectually rewarding justification by layering more demanding requirements on that basic sort, or (2) beginning with an ideal sort of justification and recognizing less demanding sorts of justification by stripping away conditions from that ideal justification.

Keywords

JustificationSosaanimal and reflective knowledge
Type
Articles
Information
Episteme , Volume 16 , Special Issue 4: 2018 Episteme Conference in Honor of Ernest Sosa , December 2019 , pp. 385 - 394
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 2019 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Bergmann, M. (2006). Justification without Awareness. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Fales, E. (1996). A Defense of the Given. Lanham, MD: Rowman and Littlefield.Google Scholar
Foley, R. (1990). ‘Fumerton's Puzzle.’ Journal of Philosophical Research 14, 109–13.Google Scholar
Fumerton, R. (1990). Reason and Morality: A Defense of the Egocentric Perspective. Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press.Google Scholar
Fumerton, R. (1996). Metaepistemology and Skepticism. Boston: Rowman & Littlefield.Google Scholar
Fumerton, R. (2006). Epistemology. Oxford: Blackwell.Google Scholar
Fumerton, R. (2008). ‘Achieving Epistemic Ascent.’ In Greco, J. (ed.), Ernest Sosa and His Critics, pp. 72–85. Chichester: Wiley.Google Scholar
Fumerton, R. (2010). ‘Evidentialism and Truth.’ In Dougherty, T. (ed.), Evidentialism and its Discontents, pp. 179–92. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Fumerton, R. (2016 a). ‘Prospects for Traditional Internalism.’ In Bergmann, M. and Coppenger, B. (eds), Intellectual Assurance: Essays on Traditional Epistemic Internalism. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Fumerton, R. (2016 b). ‘Rising Above the Animals: The Search for Intellectual Assurance.’ In Fernandez, M. (ed.), Performance Epistemology, pp. 151–66. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Fumerton, R. (2018). ‘Inferential Internalism and the Problem of Unconscious Inference.’ In McCain, K. and Poston, T. (eds), The Mystery of Skepticism: New Explorations, pp. 176–86. Leiden: Brill.Google Scholar
Goldman, A. (1988) ‘Strong vs Weak Justification.’ In Tomerlin, J. (ed.), Philosophical Perspectives 2: Epistemology, pp. 51–69. Atascadero, CA: Ridgeview Publishing.Google Scholar
Littlejohn, C. (2012). Justification and the Truth-Connection. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Markie, P. (2005). ‘Easy Knowledge.’ Philosophy and Phenomenological Research 70, 406–16.Google Scholar
Moon, A. (2017). ‘Beliefs do not Come in Degrees.’ Canadian Journal of Philosophy 47, 760–78.Google Scholar
Sosa, E. (2016). ‘How Our Knowledge Squares with Skeptical Intuitions Despite the Circle.’ In Coppenger, B. and Bergmann, M. (eds), Intellectual Assurance: Essays on Traditional Epistemic Internalism. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Stroud, B. (1984). The Significance of Philosophical Scepticism. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Williamson, T. (Forthcoming). ‘Justifications, Excuses, and Skeptical Scenarios.’ In Dutant, J. and Dorsch, F. (eds), The New Evil Demon. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar