Abstract

This study deals essentially with the problem of how to assess the strength of certain global sceptical arguments, such as, the infinite regress argument. The thesis consists of a critical discussion of four prominent theories of knowledge in the current epistemological debate. The discussed theories are: Laurence Bon Jour's coherence theory of knowledge, Robert Nozick's tracking-the-truth theory, Barry Stroud's Cartesian theory of knowledge and Edward Craig's contextualism. The critical discussion results in a proposal of an alternative theory of knowledge named the Best-Available Method-theory. This theory has the advantage of not vitiating our ordinary intuitions regarding the concept of knowledge. The BAM theory also aims to explain the inclinations towards and against global sceptical challenges. It is stated that there are certain serious problems in challenging some of the sceptical philosopher's conclusions. Further, the BAM theory explains the attractions and the drawbacks of major, rival theories in the epistemological debate, such as foundationalism, coherentism and internalism, externalism. The upshot of the critical discussion could be seen as an ecumenical theory of knowledge.