Abstract
Abstract
Virtue epistemologies about knowledge have traditionally been divided into two camps: virtue reliabilism and virtue responsibilism. Initially, what set them apart was that virtue responsibilism took intellectual character virtues and responsible agency to be necessary to knowledge acquisition, whereas virtue reliabilism took reliable cognitive faculties to be constitutive of it instead. Despite recent concessions between these camps, there are residual disagreements. Chapter 8 focuses primarily on Linda Zagzebski’s account of virtue responsibilism and John Greco’s and Ernest Sosa’s defenses of virtue reliabilism. It argues that despite their misgivings about virtue responsibilism, Greco and Sosa are ultimately required to accept that intellectual character virtues involve a substantial truth-motivational component, and that knowledge requires a kind of epistemic responsibility that is far more substantive than a causal, naturalistic notion of attribution.
Publisher
Oxford University PressOxford
Reference94 articles.
1. Recent Work in Virtue Epistemology.;American Philosophical Quarterly,1997
2. Axtell, G. (2011). From Internalist Evidentialism to Virtue Responsibilism. In Dougherty, T. (ed.), Evidentialism and Its Discontents, Oxford: Oxford University Press: 71–87.
3. Aristotle on Episteme and Nous: The Posterior Analytics.;Southern Journal of Philosophy,1998
4. Character in Epistemology.;Philosophical Studies,2006
5. Character, Reliability and Virtue Epistemology.;The Philosophical Quarterly,2006