Conclusion
Russell's attempt to demonstrate the insufficiency and nonnecessity of Lehrer's epistemology fails on both counts. His modified Nogot example does not constitute a counterexample to Lehrer's theory, though it does establish the insufficiency of (RTK). The relevant versions of both of his counterexamples to necessity occasion radically conflicting intuitions and, as a result, are far from decisive. Moreover, if they work against Lehrer's theory, and it is by no means obvious that they do, then they also demonstrate the nonnecessity of Russell's theory. In the final analysis, we may conclude that if Russell's three counterexamples demonstrate anything, they demonstrate that Lehrer's epistemology is superior to (RTK).
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Engel, M. Russellizing Russell: A reply to his “A critique of Lehrer's coherentism”. Philos Stud 66, 98–108 (1992). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00668398
Revised:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00668398