Fallibilism

Philosophy Compass 7 (9):585-596 (2012)
  Copy   BIBTEX

Abstract

Although recent epistemology has been marked by several prominent disagreements – e.g., between foundationalists and coherentists, internalists and externalists – there has been widespread agreement that some form of fallibilism must be correct. According to a rough formulation of this view, it is possible for a subject to have knowledge even in cases where the justification or grounding for the knowledge is compatible with the subject’s being mistaken. In this paper, I examine the motivation for fallibilism before providing a fully general account of the view. I conclude by looking at the two major difficulties for fallibilism: the Gettier problem and the lottery paradox.

Links

PhilArchive



    Upload a copy of this work     Papers currently archived: 91,271

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

How to think about fallibilism.Baron Reed - 2002 - Philosophical Studies 107 (2):143-157.
Peirce, fallibilism, and the science of mathematics.Elizabeth F. Cooke - 2003 - Philosophia Mathematica 11 (2):158-175.
Fallibilism, Factivity and Epistemically Truth-Guaranteeing Justification.Boris Rähme - 2007 - In Nils Gilje & Harald Grimen (eds.), Discursive Modernity. Universitetsforlaget.
Fallibilism and rational belief.Ruth Weintraub - 1993 - British Journal for the Philosophy of Science 44 (2):251-261.
Knowledge and certainty.Jason Stanley - 2008 - Philosophical Issues 18 (1):35-57.
Fallibilism and the flexibility of epistemic modals.Charity Anderson - 2014 - Philosophical Studies 167 (3):597-606.
Fallibilism.Stephen Hetherington - 2005 - Internet Encyclopedia of Philosophy.

Analytics

Added to PP
2012-08-23

Downloads
276 (#70,314)

6 months
26 (#109,051)

Historical graph of downloads
How can I increase my downloads?

Author's Profile

Baron Reed
Northwestern University

Citations of this work

A Cumulative Case Argument for Infallibilism.Nevin Climenhaga - 2021 - In Christos Kyriacou & Kevin Wallbridge (eds.), Skeptical Invariantism Reconsidered. Routledge.
Why Purists Should Be Infallibilists.Michael Hannon - 2020 - Philosophical Studies 177 (3):689-704.
Skepticism, Fallibilism, and Rational Evaluation.Michael Hannon - 2021 - In Christos Kyriacou & Kevin Wallbridge (eds.), Skeptical Invariantism Reconsidered. Routledge.
Hope, Worry, and Suspension of Judgment.James Fritz - 2021 - Canadian Journal of Philosophy 51 (8):573-587.

View all 18 citations / Add more citations

References found in this work

Knowledge and its limits.Timothy Williamson - 2000 - New York: Oxford University Press.
Philosophical explanations.Robert Nozick - 1981 - Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press.
Knowledge and lotteries.John Hawthorne - 2004 - New York: Oxford University Press.
Knowledge in an uncertain world.Jeremy Fantl & Matthew McGrath - 2009 - New York: Oxford University Press. Edited by Matthew McGrath.

View all 95 references / Add more references