Reply to Adams and Clarke

Logos and Episteme 7 (2):221-225 (2016)
  Copy   BIBTEX

Abstract

Here I defend two counterexamples to Nozick’s truth-tracking theory of knowledge from an attack on them by Adams and Clarke. With respect to the first counterexample, Adams and Clarke make the error of judging that my belief counts as knowledge. More demonstrably, with respect to the second counterexample they make the error of thinking that, on Nozick’s method-relativized theory, the method M in question in any given case must be generally reliable.

Similar books and articles

Resurrecting the tracking theories.Fred Adams & Murray Clarke - 2005 - Australasian Journal of Philosophy 83 (2):207 – 221.
Defending the Tracking Theories of Knowledge.Fred Adams & Murray Clarke - 2007 - The Proceedings of the Twenty-First World Congress of Philosophy 6:3-8.
Perceptual knowledge derailed.Jonathan Schaffer - 2003 - Philosophical Studies 112 (1):31-45.
Tracking Theories of Knowledge.Fred Adams - 2005 - Veritas – Revista de Filosofia da Pucrs 50 (4):1-35.
Recursive tracking versus process reliabilism.Alvin I. Goldman - 2009 - Philosophy and Phenomenological Research 79 (1):223-230.
Tracking truth: knowledge, evidence, and science.Sherrilyn Roush - 2005 - New York: Oxford University Press.
Reliabilism.Alvin Goldman - 2008 - Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy.
Extended cognition meets epistemology.Fred Adams - 2012 - Philosophical Explorations 15 (2):107 - 119.
Truth-tracking and the Problem of Reflective Knowledge.Joseph Salerno - 2010 - In Joseph Keim Campbell, Michael O'Rourke & Harry S. Silverstein (eds.), Knowledge and Skepticism. MIT Press. pp. 73-83.

Analytics

Added to PP
2016-07-08

Downloads
315 (#65,204)

6 months
87 (#55,344)

Historical graph of downloads
How can I increase my downloads?

Author's Profile

Tristan Grøtvedt Haze
University of Melbourne

Citations of this work

Rejoinder to Haze.Fred Adams & Murray Clarke - 2016 - Logos and Episteme 7 (2):227-230.

Add more citations