Skip to main content Accessibility help
×
×
Home

Deductive Justification

  • Catherine M. Canary (a1) and Douglas Odegard (a1)

Extract

The principle that epistemic justification is necessarily transmitted to all the known logical consequences of a justified belief continues to attract critical attention. That attention is not misplaced. If the Transmission Principle is valid, anyone who thinks that a given belief is justified must defend the view that every known consequence of the belief is also justification of the conclusion in an obviously valid argument. Once created, the gap is hard to fill, whatever the circumstances. Reflection principle is modified, the possibility of deductive justification is threatened. If some known consequence fails to be justified, the failure may extend to every known consequence. To reject Transmission is to insert a logical gap between the justification of a premise and the justification of the conclusion in an obviously valid argument. Once created, the gap is hard to fill, whatever the circumstances. Reflection on the Transmission Principle therefore usefully brings us face to face with the following dilemma: accept the principle and hand Cartesian scepticism a powerful weapon, or modify the principle and risk undermining deductive justification.

Copyright

References

Hide All
Adler, J., 1981Skepticism and Universalizability”. Journal of Philosophy 78.
Audi, Robert, 1988 Belief, Justification, and Knowledge. Belmont, CA: Wadsworth, chap. 5.
Brueckner, Anthony, 1984 “Epistemic Universalizability Principles”, Philosophical Studies 46.
Brueckner, Anthony, 1985a “Skepticism and Epistemic Closure”, Philosophical Topics 13, 89117.
Brueckner, Anthony, 1985b “Transmission for Knowledge Not Established”, Philosophical Quarterly 35.
Coder, David, 1970Thalberg's Defense of Justified True Belief”, Journal of Philosophy 67, 424425.
Dancy, Jonathan, 1984On the Tracks of the Sceptic”, Analysis 44, 121126.
Donnellan, Keith S., 1966Reference and Definite Descriptions”, Philosophical Review 75, 281304.
Dretske, Fred, 1970Epistemic Operators”, Journal of Philosophy 67, 10071023.
Dretske, Fred, 1972Contrastive Statements”, Philosophical Review 81, 411430.
Dretske, Fred, 1981 “The Pragmatic Dimension of Knowledge”, Philosophical Studies 40.
Forbes, Graeme, 1984Nozick on Scepticism”, Philosophical Quarterly 34, 4352.
Freed, Bruce, 1986Modest Scepticism”, Dialogue 25, 353361.
Gettier, Edmund, 1963Is Justified True Belief Knowledge?”, Analysis 23, 121123.
Goldman, Alvin, 1976Discrimination and Perceptual Knowledge”, Journal of Philosophy 73, 771791.
Hooker, Michael K., 1973In Defense of the Principle for Deducibility of Justification”, Philosophical Studies 24, 402406.
Klein, Peter, 1981 Certainty: A Refutation of Scepticism. Minneapolis, MN: University of Minnesota Press.
Luper-Foy, Steven, 1984The Epistemic Predicament: Knowledge, Nozickian Tracking, and Scepticism”, Australasian Journal of Philosophy 63, 2649.
Malcolm, Norman, 1964 “The Verification Argument”, in his Knowledge and Certainty. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.
Margolis, J., 1972The Problem of Justified Belief”. Philosophical Studies 23, 405409.
Moore, G. E., 1959 “Four Forms of Scepticism”, in his Philosophical Papers. London: Allen & Unwin.
New, C. G., 1965Some Implications of ‘Someone’”, Analysis 26, 6264.
New, C. G., 1968‘Someone’ Renewed”, Analysis 28, 109112.
Nozick, Robert, 1981 Philosophical Explanation. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
Odegard, Douglas, 1986Demon Scepticism”, American Philosophical Quarterly 23, 209216.
Richman, Robert, 1975Justified True Belief as Knowledge”, Canadian Journal of Philosophy 4, 435439.
Saunders, John Turk, 1972Thalberg's Challenge to Justification via Deduction”, Philosophical Studies 23, 358363.
Shugar, Scott, 1983Knowledge and its Consequences”, American Philosophical Quarterly 20, 217225.
Stine, Gail, 1971Dretske on Knowing the Logical Consequences”, Journal of Philosophy 67, 296–99.
Stine, Gail, 1976Skepticism, Relevant Alternatives and Deductive Closure”, Philosophical Studies 29, 249261.
Stroud, Barry, 1984 The Significance of Philosophical Scepticism. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Thalberg, Irving, 1969In Defense of Justified Truth Belief”, Journal of Philosophy 66, 794803.
Thalberg, Irving, 1974Is Justification Transmissible Through Deduction?”, Philosophical Studies 25, 347356.
Unger, Peter, 1975 Ignorance: A Case for Scepticism. Oxford: Clarendon Press.
Wolgast, Elizabeth, 1977 Paradoxes of Knowledge. Ithaca: Cornell University Press.
Wright, Crispin, 1983Keeping Track of Nozick”, Analysis 43, 134140.
Yourgrau, Palle, 1983Skepticism and Relevant Alternatives”, Synthese 55, 175190.
Recommend this journal

Email your librarian or administrator to recommend adding this journal to your organisation's collection.

Dialogue: Canadian Philosophical Review / Revue canadienne de philosophie
  • ISSN: 0012-2173
  • EISSN: 1759-0949
  • URL: /core/journals/dialogue-canadian-philosophical-review-revue-canadienne-de-philosophie
Please enter your name
Please enter a valid email address
Who would you like to send this to? *
×

Metrics

Full text views

Total number of HTML views: 0
Total number of PDF views: 0 *
Loading metrics...

Abstract views

Total abstract views: 0 *
Loading metrics...

* Views captured on Cambridge Core between <date>. This data will be updated every 24 hours.

Usage data cannot currently be displayed