Epistemic Justification: Probability, Normalcy, and the Functional Theory

Australasian Journal of Philosophy 101 (1):65-81 (2023)
  Copy   BIBTEX

Abstract

This paper puts forward a novel pluralist theory of epistemic justification that brings together two competing views in the literature—probabilistic and non-probabilistic accounts of justification. The first part of the paper motivates the new theory by arguing that neither probabilistic nor non-probabilistic accounts alone are wholly satisfactory. The second part puts forward what I call the Functional Theory of Justification. The key merit of the new theory is that it combines the most attractive features of both probabilistic and non-probabilistic accounts of justification while avoiding their most serious shortcomings. The paper also provides a blueprint for future pluralist projects in epistemology.

Links

PhilArchive



    Upload a copy of this work     Papers currently archived: 91,571

External links

Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server

Through your library

Similar books and articles

Normalcy, justification, and the easy-defeat problem.Marvin Backes - 2019 - Philosophical Studies 176 (11):2877-2895.
What justification could not be.Mark T. Nelson - 2002 - International Journal of Philosophical Studies 10 (3):265 – 281.
Williamson on justification.Dennis Whitcomb - 2008 - Philosophical Studies 138 (2):161 - 168.
Epistemic Justification Revisited.Sanford C. Goldberg - 2016 - Journal of Philosophical Research 41 (9999):1-16.
Causal reference and epistemic justification.Jane Duran - 1988 - Philosophy of Science 55 (2):272-279.
Epistemology and probability.John L. Pollock - 1983 - Synthese 55 (2):231-252.
Coherentism, truth, and witness agreement.William A. Roche - 2010 - Acta Analytica 25 (2):243-257.
On Some Arguments for Epistemic Value Pluralism.Timothy Perrine - 2020 - Logos and Episteme 11 (1):77-96.

Analytics

Added to PP
2021-10-15

Downloads
53 (#298,927)

6 months
11 (#231,656)

Historical graph of downloads
How can I increase my downloads?

Author's Profile

Marvin Backes
University of Cologne

Citations of this work

No citations found.

Add more citations

References found in this work

Truth and Objectivity.Crispin Wright - 1992 - Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press.
What's wrong with Moore's argument?James Pryor - 2004 - Philosophical Issues 14 (1):349–378.
The paradox of the preface.David C. Makinson - 1965 - Analysis 25 (6):205-207.

View all 24 references / Add more references