Hostname: page-component-cb9f654ff-mnl9s Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2025-08-23T21:05:20.588Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

NORMAN AND TRUETEMP REVISITED RELIABILISTICALLY: A PROPER FUNCTIONALIST DEFEAT ACCOUNT OF CLAIRVOYANCE

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  09 February 2016

Harmen Ghijsen
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

The cases of Norman the Clairvoyant and Mr. Truetemp form classic counterexamples to the process reliabilist's claim that reliability is sufficient for prima facie justification. I discuss several ways in which contemporary reliabilists have tried to deal with these counterexamples, and argue that they are all unsuccessful. Instead, I propose that the most promising route lies with an appeal to a specific kind of higher-order defeat that is best cashed out in terms of properly functioning monitoring mechanisms.

Information

Type
Articles
Information
Episteme , Volume 13 , Issue 1: The Epistemology of Perception , March 2016 , pp. 89 - 110
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 2016 

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.)

Article purchase

Temporarily unavailable

References

REFERENCES

Beddor, B. 2015. ‘Process Reliabilism's Troubles with Defeat.’ Philosophical Quarterly, 65(259): 145–59.Google Scholar
Bedke, M. S. 2010. ‘Developmental Process Reliabilism: On Justification, Defeat, and Evidence.’ Erkenntnis, 73(1): 1–17.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Beebe, J. R. 2004. ‘Reliabilism, Truetemp and New Perceptual Faculties.’ Synthese, 140(3): 307–29.Google Scholar
Bergmann, M. 2006. Justification without Awareness: A Defense of Epistemic Externalism. Oxford Scholarship Online. Philosophy module. Oxford: Clarendon Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bernecker, S. 2008. ‘Agent Reliabilism and the Problem of Clairvoyance.’ Philosophy and Phenomenological Research, 76(1): 164–72.Google Scholar
BonJour, L. 1985. The Structure of Empirical Knowledge. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
Breyer, D. and Greco, J. 2008. ‘Cognitive Integration and the Ownership of Belief: Response to Bernecker.’ Philosophy and Phenomenological Research, 76(1): 173–84.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Byrne, A. 2005. ‘Introspection.’ Philosophical Topics, 33(1): 79–104.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Comesaña, J. 2010. ‘Evidentialist Reliabilism.’ Noûs, 44(4): 571–600.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dokic, J. 2012. ‘Seeds of Self-knowledge: Noetic Feelings and Metacognition.’ In Beran, M. J., Brandl, J., Perner, J. and Proust, J. (eds), Foundations of Metacognition, pp. 302–21. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Ghijsen, H. 2014. ‘Phenomenalist Dogmatist Experientialism and the Distinctiveness Problem.’ Synthese, 191(7): 1549–66.Google Scholar
Goldman, A. 1979. ‘What is Justified Belief?’ In Pappas, G. (ed.), Justification and Knowledge, pp. 1–23. Dordrecht: D. Reidel.Google Scholar
Goldman, A. 2011. ‘Reliabilism.’ In Zalta, E. N. (ed.), The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy (Spring 2011 Edition), http://plato.stanford.edu/archives/spr2011/entries/reliabilism/.Google Scholar
Goldman, A. I. 2009. ‘Replies to Discussants.’ Grazer Philosophische Studien, 79(1): 245–88.Google Scholar
Graham, P. J. 2011. ‘Perceptual Entitlement and Basic Beliefs.’ Philosophical Studies, 153(3): 467–75.Google Scholar
Graham, P. J. 2012. ‘Epistemic Entitlement.’ Noûs, 46(3): 449–82.Google Scholar
Graham, P. J. 2014. ‘Functions, Warrant, History.’ In Fairweather, A. and Flanagan, O. (eds), Naturalizing Epistemic Virtue, pp. 15–35. New York, NY: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Greco, J. 2000. Putting Skeptics in their Place: The Nature of Skeptical Arguments and their Role in Philosophical Inquiry. New York, NY: Cambridge University Press, 2007 digital print edition.Google Scholar
Greco, J. 2003. ‘Further Thoughts On Agent Reliabilism: Replies to Cohen, Geivett, Kvanvig, and Schmitt and Lahroodi.’ Philosophy and Phenomenological Research, 66(2): 466–80.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Grundmann, T. 2009. ‘Reliabilism and the Problem of Defeaters.’ Grazer Philosophische Studien, 79(1): 65–76.Google Scholar
Johnson, D. M. 2011. ‘Proper Function and Defeating Experiences.’ Synthese, 182(3): 433–47.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kelp, C. and Ghijsen, H. 2016. ‘Perceptual Justification: Factive Reasons and Fallible Virtues.’ In Mi, C., Slote, M. and Sosa, E. (eds), Moral and Intellectual Virtues, pp. 164–83. New York, NY: Routledge.Google Scholar
Kvanvig, J. 2007. ‘Two Approaches to Epistemic Defeat.’ In Baker, D.-P. (ed.), Alvin Plantinga, pp. 107–24. New York, NY: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Lehrer, K. 1990. Theory of Knowledge. Boulder, CO: Westview Press.Google Scholar
Lyons, J. 2009. Perception and Basic Beliefs: Zombies, Modules and the Problem of the External World. New York, NY: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Majors, B. and Sawyer, S. 2005. ‘The Epistemological Argument for Content Externalism.’ Philosophical Perspectives, 19(1): 257–80.Google Scholar
Millar, A. 2010. ‘Knowledge and Recognition.’ In Pritchard, D., Millar, A. and Haddock, A. (eds), The Nature and Value of Knowledge: Three Investigations, pp. 89–188. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Plantinga, A. 1993. Warrant and Proper Function. New York, NY: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Plantinga, A. 1996. ‘Alvin Plantinga Replies.’ In Kvanvig, J. (ed.), Warrant in Contemporary Epistemology: Essays in Honor of Plantinga’s Theory of Knowledge, pp. 307–78. Lanham, MD: Rowman & Littlefield Publishers.Google Scholar
Plantinga, A. 2000. Warranted Christian Belief. New York, NY: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Pollock, J. 1974. Knowledge and Justification. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
Proust, J. 2013. The Philosophy of Metacognition: Mental Agency and Self-Awareness. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Ruloff, C. 2000. ‘Some Remarks on Bonjour on Warrant, Proper Function, and Defeasibility.’ Principia: An International Journal of Epistemology, 4(2): 215–28.Google Scholar
Sosa, E. 1993. ‘Proper Functionalism and Virtue Epistemology.’ Noûs, 27: 51–65.Google Scholar
Steup, M. 2004. ‘Internalist Reliabilism.’ Philosophical Issues, 14(1): 403–25.Google Scholar
Steup, M. 2013. ‘Does Phenomenal Conservatism Solve Internalism's Dilemma?’ In Tucker, C. (ed.), Seemings and Justification: New Essays on Dogmatism and Phenomenal Conservatism, pp. 135–53. New York, NY: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar