Skip to main content
Log in

Sosa’s Safety Condition and Problem of Philosophical Skepticism

  • Published:
Philosophia Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

This paper aims to show that Sosa’s theory of knowledge based on safety condition can provide a convincing response to the problem of philosophical skepticism. With regard to that, it is divided in three sections. The first section is dedicated to presenting the form of skeptical argument and few options we encounter when skeptic rises the challenge in the form of the so-called radical alternatives. The second section consists of the presentation of Sosa’s theory and safety condition, as well as its differences and similarities with Nozick’s sensitivity condition and Dretske’s condition of conclusive reason. Finally, the third section evaluates Sosa’s theory in the light of Comesana’s counterexample. After the careful analysis of the hypothetical situation, it is shown that Comesana overlooks one important moment when he fixes the initial set of circumstances, which allows a successful defense of Sosa’s analysis of knowledge and safety condition.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Aspector-Kelly, M. (2011). Why safety doesn’t save closure. Synthese, 183, 127–142.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Comesana, J. (2005). Unsafe knowledge. Synthese, 146, 395–404.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dretske, F. (1970). Epistemic operators. The Journal of Philosophy, 67, 1007–1023.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dretske, F. (1971). Conclusive reasons. Australian Journal of Philosophy, 49, 1–22.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lazovic, Z. (2012). Problem filozofskog skepticizma, Institut za filozofiju, Filozofski fakultet, Beograd.

  • Nozick, R. (1981). Philosophical Explanations. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pritchard, D. (2002). Ressurecting the Moorean response to the sceptic. International Journal of Philosophical Studies, 10, 283–307.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pritchard, D. (2014). Knowledge cannot be lucky. In M. Seup, J. Turri, & E. Sosa (Eds.), Contemporary debates in epistemology (pp. 152–164). United States: Blackwell.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sosa, E. (1999a). How must knowledge be modally related to what is known? Philosophical Topics, 26, 373–384.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sosa, E. (1999b). How to defeat opposition to Moore? Philosophical Perspectives, 13, 141–153.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sosa, E. (2000). Replies to Tomberlin, Kornblith, Lehrer. Philosophical Issues, 10, 38–42.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Bogdana Stamenković.

Additional information

Publisher’s Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Stamenković, B. Sosa’s Safety Condition and Problem of Philosophical Skepticism. Philosophia 49, 421–435 (2021). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11406-020-00219-0

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11406-020-00219-0

Keywords

Navigation