Epistemology versus non-causal realism.

This paper formulates a general epistemological argument against what I call non-causal realism, generalizing domain specific arguments by Benacerraf, Field, and others. First I lay out the background to the argument, making a number of distinctions that are sometimes missed in discussions of episte...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Publicado en:Synthese Vol. 194; no. 5; pp. 1643 - 1663
Autor principal: Warren, Jared
Formato: Artículo
Publicado: Springer Nature May2017
Materias:
Acceso en línea:Ver este registro en EBSCOhost
fields @attributes:
  recordID: 1
pdfLink:
plink: https://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=hlh&AN=123085385&site=ehost-live
header:
  @attributes:
    shortDbName: hlh
    uiTerm: 123085385
    longDbName: Humanities International Complete
    uiTag: AN
  controlInfo:
    bkinfo:
    jinfo:
      jid:
        00397857
        4LI
      jtl: Synthese
      issn: 00397857
      maglogo: N
    pubinfo:
      dt: May2017
      vid: 194
      iid: 5
      pid: 237
      pub: Springer Nature
    artinfo:
      ui:
        123085385
        10.1007/s11229-015-1010-z
      ppf: 1643
      ppct: 20
      formats:
        fmt:
          @attributes:
            type: P
            size: 502KB
      tig:
        atl: Epistemology versus non-causal realism.
      aug:
        au: Warren, Jared
        affil: Jacksonville USA
      su:
        Theory of knowledge
        Socialist realism
        Reliability (Personality trait)
        Rationalism
        Philosophy
      sug:
        subj:
          Theory of knowledge
          Socialist realism
          Reliability (Personality trait)
          Rationalism
          Philosophy
      keyword:
        Epistemological arguments against realism
        Epistemology
        Realism
        Reliability challenge
      ab: This paper formulates a general epistemological argument against what I call non-causal realism, generalizing domain specific arguments by Benacerraf, Field, and others. First I lay out the background to the argument, making a number of distinctions that are sometimes missed in discussions of epistemological arguments against realism. Then I define the target of the argument-non-causal realism-and argue that any non-causal realist theory, no matter the subject matter, cannot be given a reasonable epistemology and so should be rejected. Finally I discuss and respond to several possible responses to the argument. In addition to clearing up and avoiding numerous misunderstandings of arguments of this kind that are quite common in the literature, this paper aims to present and endorse a rigorous and fully general epistemological argument against realism.
      pubtype: Academic Journal
      doctype: Article
      src: R
    language: English
    refInfo:
    copyright:
      @attributes:
        flag: Y
      custom: Synthese is a copyright of Springer, 2017. All Rights Reserved.
      item: Synthese
      holder: Springer Nature
      dt:
        @attributes:
          year: 2017
    holdings:
      @attributes:
        islocal: N