Advertisement

Synthese

, Volume 195, Issue 10, pp 4551–4562 | Cite as

On justifications and excuses

  • B. J. C. Madison
Article

Abstract

The New Evil Demon problem has been hotly debated since the case was introduced in the early 1980’s (e.g. Lehrer and Cohen in Synthese 55:191–207, 1983; Cohen in Philos Stud 46:279–295, 1984), and there seems to be recent increased interest in the topic. In a forthcoming collection of papers on the New Evil Demon problem (Dutant and Dorsch in The New Evil Demon, Oxford University Press, forthcoming), at least two of the papers, both by prominent epistemologists, attempt to resist the problem by appealing to the distinction between justification and excuses. My primary aim here is to critically evaluate this new excuse maneuver as a response to the New Evil Demon problem. Their response attempts to give us reason to reject the idea that victims of the New Evil Demon have justification for believing as they do. I shall argue that this approach is ultimately unsuccessful, however much of value can be learned from these attempts. In particular, progress in the debate can be made by following those who advance the excuse maneuver and make explicit the connection between epistemic justification and epistemic norms. By doing so, the questions being debated are clarified, as is the methodology being used to attempt to answer them.

Keywords

Epistemology Epistemic justification Epistemic internalism Excuses 

References

  1. Bach, K. (1985). A rationale for reliabilism. The Monist, 68, 246–263.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Boult, C. (2016). Epistemic normativity and the justification-excuse distinction. Synthese. doi: 10.1007/s11229-016-1127-8.
  3. Cohen, S. (1984). Justification and truth. Philosophical Studies, 46, 279–295.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Cohen, S. (2016). Theorizing about the epistemic. Inquiry. doi: 10.1080/0020174X.2016.1208903.
  5. Dutant, J. & Dorsch, F. (Eds.) (forthcoming). The New Evil Demon. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  6. Engel, M. (1992). Personal and doxastic justification. Philosophical Studies, 67, 133–151.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Goldman, A. (1979). What is justified belief. In G. Pappas (Ed.), Justification and knowledge (pp. 1–23). Dordrecht, Holland: D. Reidel.Google Scholar
  8. Goldman, A. (1986). Epistemology and cognition. Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
  9. Kvanvig, J., & Menzel, C. (1990). The basic notion of justification. Philosophical Studies, 59(3), 235–261.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Lehrer, K., & Cohen, S. (1983). Justification, truth, and coherence. Synthese, 55, 191–207.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Littlejohn, C. (2009). The externalist’s demon. Canadian Journal of Philosophy, 39, 399–434.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Littlejohn, C. (2012). Justification and the truth-connection. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Littlejohn, C. (forthcoming). A plea for epistemic excuses. In Dutant and Dorsch.Google Scholar
  14. Lackey, J. (2007). Norms of assertion. Nous, 41, 594–626.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Lowy, C. (1978). Gettier’s notion of justification. Mind, 87(345), 105–108.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Madison, B. J. C. (2014). Epistemological disjunctivism and the New Evil Demon. Acta Analytica, 29, 61–70.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Pagin, P. (2016). Assertion. In E. N. Zalta (Ed.), The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy (Winter 2016 Edition). https://plato.stanford.edu/archives/win2016/entries/assertion/.
  18. Pritchard, D. (2012). Epistemological disjunctivism. Oxford: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Shaw, K. (Forthcoming). A Better Disjunctivist Response to the ‘New Evil Genius’ Challenge. Grazer Philosophische Studien. doi: 10.1163/18756735-000010.
  20. Sosa, E. (2007). A virtue epistemology: Apt belief and reflective knowledge (Vol. 1). Oxford: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Sutton, J. (2007). Without justification. Cambridge, Mass.: The MIT Press.Google Scholar
  22. Weiner, M. (2005). Must we know what we say? The Philosophical Review, 114, 227–251.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Williamson, T. (2000). Knowledge and its limits. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  24. Williamson, T. (forthcoming). Justifications, excuses, and sceptical scenarios. In Dutant and Dorsch.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature B.V. 2017

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Philosophy, College of Humanities and Social SciencesUnited Arab Emirates UniversityAl AinUnited Arab Emirates

Personalised recommendations