Why purists should be infallibilists

Hannon, Michael

Abstract

© 2018, Springer Nature B.V. Two of the most orthodox ideas in epistemology are fallibilism and purism. According to the fallibilist, one can know that a particular claim is true even though one’s justification for that claim is less than fully conclusive. According to the purist, knowledge does not depend on practical factors. Fallibilism and purism are widely assumed to be compatible; in fact, the combination of these views has been called the ‘ho-hum,’ obvious, traditional view of knowledge. But I will argue that fallibilism and purism are incompatible. The best explanation for fallibilism requires one to reject purism, while maintaining purism should lead one to reject fallibilism. It follows that the orthodox view of knowledge is deeply mistaken.

Citation

Hannon, M. (2018). Why purists should be infallibilists. Philosophical Studies, 177, 689-704. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11098-018-1200-x

• Journal Article Type: Article
• Acceptance Date: Nov 17, 2018
• Online Publication Date: Nov 17, 2018
• Publication Date: Nov 17, 2018
• Deposit Date: Jul 16, 2019
• Journal: Philosophical Studies
• Print ISSN: 0031-8116
• Electronic ISSN: 1573-0883
• Publisher: Springer Verlag
• Peer Reviewed: Peer Reviewed
• Volume: 177
• Pages: 689-704
• DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11098-018-1200-x
• Public URL: https://nottingham-repository.worktribe.com/output/2311227
• Publisher URL: https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007%2Fs11098-018-1200-x