Infallibilism and Evidential Support

This chapter examines and criticizes the infallibilist’s commitment to the Sufficiency of Knowledge for Self-Support : if one knows that p then p is part of one’s evidence for p. This claim about evidential support faces the important challenge of explaining why it is generally infelicitous to cite...

Full description

Bibliographic Details
Main Author: Brown, Jessica
Format: Book
Language:unknown
Published: Oxford University Press 2018
Subjects:
Online Access:http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/oso/9780198801771.003.0003
id croxfordunivpr:10.1093/oso/9780198801771.003.0003
record_format openpolar
spelling croxfordunivpr:10.1093/oso/9780198801771.003.0003 2023-05-15T14:35:57+02:00 Infallibilism and Evidential Support Brown, Jessica 2018 http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/oso/9780198801771.003.0003 unknown Oxford University Press Oxford Scholarship Online book 2018 croxfordunivpr https://doi.org/10.1093/oso/9780198801771.003.0003 2022-08-05T10:28:50Z This chapter examines and criticizes the infallibilist’s commitment to the Sufficiency of Knowledge for Self-Support : if one knows that p then p is part of one’s evidence for p. This claim about evidential support faces the important challenge of explaining why it is generally infelicitous to cite a known proposition as evidence for itself. For instance, even if one knows, say, that Arctic sea ice is retreating, it’s infelicitous to reply to a request for evidence that Arctic sea ice is retreating by simply saying, ‘Arctic sea ice is retreating’. Intuitively, this reply constitutes a refusal to provide evidence that Arctic sea ice is retreating. The infallibilist might attempt to appeal to pragmatics or an error theory to explain away the infelicity. But I argue that these strategies fail. Book Arctic Sea ice Oxford University Press (via Crossref) Arctic
institution Open Polar
collection Oxford University Press (via Crossref)
op_collection_id croxfordunivpr
language unknown
description This chapter examines and criticizes the infallibilist’s commitment to the Sufficiency of Knowledge for Self-Support : if one knows that p then p is part of one’s evidence for p. This claim about evidential support faces the important challenge of explaining why it is generally infelicitous to cite a known proposition as evidence for itself. For instance, even if one knows, say, that Arctic sea ice is retreating, it’s infelicitous to reply to a request for evidence that Arctic sea ice is retreating by simply saying, ‘Arctic sea ice is retreating’. Intuitively, this reply constitutes a refusal to provide evidence that Arctic sea ice is retreating. The infallibilist might attempt to appeal to pragmatics or an error theory to explain away the infelicity. But I argue that these strategies fail.
format Book
author Brown, Jessica
spellingShingle Brown, Jessica
Infallibilism and Evidential Support
author_facet Brown, Jessica
author_sort Brown, Jessica
title Infallibilism and Evidential Support
title_short Infallibilism and Evidential Support
title_full Infallibilism and Evidential Support
title_fullStr Infallibilism and Evidential Support
title_full_unstemmed Infallibilism and Evidential Support
title_sort infallibilism and evidential support
publisher Oxford University Press
publishDate 2018
url http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/oso/9780198801771.003.0003
geographic Arctic
geographic_facet Arctic
genre Arctic
Sea ice
genre_facet Arctic
Sea ice
op_source Oxford Scholarship Online
op_doi https://doi.org/10.1093/oso/9780198801771.003.0003
_version_ 1766308676889477120