Freshly Printed - allow 7 days lead
Couldn't load pickup availability
Contemporary Debates in Epistemology
Blake Roeber (Edited by), B Roeber (Author), Ernest Sosa (Edited by), Matthias Steup (Edited by), John Turri (Edited by)
9781119755449, Wiley
Paperback / softback, published 8 April 2024
384 pages
24.9 x 17.5 x 2.5 cm, 0.544 kg
The perfect introduction to contemporary epistemology, completely overhauled for its third edition In Contemporary Debates in Epistemology, pairs of specially commissioned essays defend opposing views on some of today’s most compelling epistemological issues and problems. Offering a unique blend of accessibility and originality, this timely volume brings together fresh debates on hotly contested issues to provide readers with the opportunity to engage in comparative analysis of constantly changing and developing epistemological concepts. Now in its third edition, Contemporary Debates in Epistemology features up-to-date coverage of the latest developments in the field. Entirely new essays examine questions of epistemic normativity and knowledge, the relationship between belief and credence, the possibility of internalist epistemology, epistemic instrumentalism, norms of assertion, the use of thought experiments in epistemology, and more. Part of the Wiley-Blackwell Contemporary Debates in Philosophy series, Contemporary Debates in Epistemology, Third Edition, remains an essential resource for advanced undergraduate philosophy majors, graduate students in philosophy, and epistemologists who want to keep current with contemporary epistemological debates.
Notes on Contributors vii Preface to the Third Edition xiii Preface to the Second Edition xiv Preface to the First Edition xv Introduction xvii 1 Does Knowledge Come First in Epistemology? 1 Knowledge Comes First 1 Known Unknowns and the Limits of Knowledge 7 Knowledge Still Comes First 14 Circumstantial Luck and Knowledge-First Epistemology 16 2 Does Justification Supervene on the Internal? 23 Is Justification Just in the Head? 23 The Possibility of Internalist Epistemology 36 3 Is Suspension of Judgment a Question-Directed Attitude? 55 Is Suspension of Judgment a Question-Directed Attitude? No, Not Really 55 Suspension of Judgment Is a Question-Directed Attitude 66 4 Are There Practical Reasons for Belief? 79 There Are Practical Reasons for Belief 79 There Are No Practical Reasons for Belief 81 Reply to and Kelly and Cohen 93 5 Is Evidence Permissive? 103 Introductions and Stage-Setting 103 A Permissive Notion of Rationality 105 We Are Not Mushy Permissivists and, Moreover, We Should Not Be 110 Is the Disagreement Between Us Substantive? 116 A Final Plea for Impermissivism 121 Some Final Thoughts 123 Permissivism and Metaepistemology 124 6 Does Fundamental Evidence Consist in Seemings? 127 Evidence Is Seemings 127 Evidence Is Not Seemings 134 Four Challenges for Phenomenal Conservatism 142 Preservative Memory and Trouble for Internalism 146 7 Does Knowledge Exclude Luck? 151 Knowing Can Include Luck 151 There Cannot Be Lucky Knowledge 159 On Whether Knowing Can Include Luck: Asking the Correct Question 169 Reply to Hetherington 171 8 Is the A Priori/A Posteriori Distinction Important for Epistemology? 175 Is the A Priori/A Posteriori Distinction Superficial? 175 The Significance of A Priori Justification 183 Response to Boghossian 191 Reply to Williamson 194 9 How Should We Use Thought Experiments in Epistemology? 201 How to Use Thought Experiments 201 A Guide to Thought Experiments in Epistemology 209 How to Think About How to Use Thought Experiments 218 Thinking About Using Thought Experiments: Further Questions 222 10 Is Belief a Species of Credence? 229 Credences Are Degrees of Belief 229 Is Belief Credence 1? Depends on What You Mean! 237 Two in the Model, One in the Head 247 11 Is Epistemic Normativity Instrumental? 253 Epistemic Normativity Is Independent of Our Goals 253 Epistemic Normativity Is Not Independent of Our Goals 263 A Brief Reply to Carter 274 12 Is Testimony a Basic Source of Justification? 279 A Defense of Local Reductionism About Testimony 279 Anti- Reductionism in the Epistemology of Testimony 290 Comments on Sanford Goldberg’s “Anti-Reductionism in the Epistemology of Testimony” 300 Comments on Elizabeth Fricker’s “A Defense of Local Reductionism About Testimony” 301 13 Does Common Sense Conflict with Skepticism? 305 Skepticism Is Common Sense 305 Skepticism Is Not Common Sense 311 Reply to Lawlor 318 Reply to Hazlett 323 14 Is Knowledge the Norm of Assertion? 329 Knowledge Is the Norm of Assertion 329 Knowledge Is Not Our Norm of Assertion 339 Index 355
Mona Simion
Aidan McGlynn
Mona Simion
Aidan McGlynn
Clayton Littlejohn
Kurt L. Sylvan
Matthew McGrath
Jane Friedman
Susanna Rinard
Thomas Kelly and Stewart Cohen
Susanna Rinard
Sophie Horowitz and Sinan Dogramaci
Miriam Schoenfield
Sophie Horowitz and Sinan Dogramaci
Miriam Schoenfield
Sophie Horowitz and Sinan Dogramaci
Miriam Schoenfield
Sophie Horowitz, Sinan Dogramaci, and Miriam Schoenfield
Michael Huemer
Maria Lasonen-Aarnio
Michael Huemer
Maria Lasonen-Aarnio
Stephen Hetherington
Duncan Pritchard
Stephen Hetherington
Duncan Pritchard
Timothy Williamson
Paul Boghossian
Timothy Williamson
Paul Boghossian
Elijah Chudnoff
Wesley Buckwalter
Elijah Chudnoff
Wesley Buckwalter
Roger Clarke
Julia Staffel
Roger Clarke
Alex Worsnip
J. Adam Carter
Alex Worsnip
Elizabeth Fricker
Sanford C. Goldberg
Elizabeth Fricker
Sanford C. Goldberg
Allan Hazlett
Krista Lawlor
Allan Hazlett
Krista Lawlor
Matthew A. Benton
Peter J. Graham and Nikolaj Jang Lee Linding Pedersen
Subject Areas: Philosophy [HP]
