Abstract
Abstract
Sensitivity has sometimes been thought to be a highly epistemologically significant property, serving as a proxy for a kind of responsiveness to the facts that ensure that the truth of our beliefs isn’t just a lucky coincidence. But it's an imperfect proxy: there are various well-known cases in which sensitivity-based anti-luck conditions return the wrong verdicts. And as a result of these failures, contemporary theorists often dismiss such conditions out of hand. I show here, though, that a sensitivity-based understanding of epistemic luck can be developed that respects what was attractive about sensitivity-based approaches in the first place but that's immune to these failures.
Publisher
Oxford University Press (OUP)
Reference47 articles.
1. The Function of Epistemic Justification;Adams;Canadian Journal of Philosophy,1986
2. Resurrecting the Tracking Theories;Adams;Australasian Journal of Philosophy,2005
3. Review of Sherrilyn Roush, Tracking Truth: Knowledge, Evidence, and Science;Arló-Costa;Notre Dame Philosophical Reviews,2006
4. Is Counterfactual Reliabilism Compatible with Higher-Level Knowledge?;Becker;Dialectica,2006
5. Methods and How to Individuate Them;Becker,2012
Cited by
4 articles.
订阅此论文施引文献
订阅此论文施引文献,注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献,订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献