more from this thinker     |     more from this text


Single Idea 4259

[filed under theme 13. Knowledge Criteria / C. External Justification / 3. Reliabilism / b. Anti-reliabilism ]

Full Idea

External or objective reliability is not enough to offset subjective irrationality (such as unexplained clairvoyance).

Gist of Idea

External reliability is not enough, if the internal state of the believer is known to be irrational

Source

Laurence Bonjour (Externalist Theories of Empirical Knowledge [1980], §IV)

Book Ref

'Epistemology: Internalism and Externalism', ed/tr. Kornblith,Hilary [Blackwell 2001], p.20


A Reaction

A good argument. Where do animals fit into this? If your clairvoyance kept working, in the end you might concede that you 'knew', even though you were baffled about how you managed it.


The 15 ideas with the same theme [objections to reliabilist justification]:

Knowledge needs more than a sensitive response; the response must also be appropriate [Russell]
External reliability is not enough, if the internal state of the believer is known to be irrational [Bonjour]
A true belief might be based on a generally reliable process that failed on this occasion [Blackburn]
If the reliable facts producing a belief are unknown to me, my belief is not rational or responsible [Bonjour]
Sometimes I ought to distrust sources which are actually reliable [Williams,M]
'Reliable' is a very imprecise term, and may even mean 'justified' [Audi,R]
Believing nothing, or only logical truths, is very reliable, but we want a lot more than that [Field,H]
Epistemic perfection for reliabilism is a truth-producing machine [Zagzebski]
More than actual reliability is needed, since I may mistakenly doubt what is reliable [Conee]
If pure guesses were reliable, reliabilists would have to endorse them [Conee]
Reliabilism is poor on reflective judgements about hypothetical cases [Conee]
Knowledge from a drunken schoolteacher is from a reliable and unreliable process [Potter]
In a sceptical scenario belief formation is unreliable, so no beliefs at all are justified? [Comesaņa]
How do we decide which exact process is the one that needs to be reliable? [Comesaņa]
Reliabilism cannot assess the justification for propositions we don't believe [Kvanvig]