Skip to main content
Log in

Truth-ratios, process, task, and knowledge

  • Published:
Synthese Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

In this paper, I delineate two major problems facing reliabilist approaches in epistemology. I argue that Alvin Goodman's (1986) position fails to solve either problem. I then suggest an alternative reliabilist approach that ties truth-ratio assessments to particular, well-specified cognitive tasks. I claim that a well-specified cognitive task is an empirical hypothesis about a system that involves the specification of input and output types and nomic correlations (including statistical correlations) that underlie the system's performance. On my approach, one characterizes processes by reference to the system's dispositions across the situations consistent with the task. Characterization is best understood as revealing a strategy or a set of strategies for generating outputs from inputs relying on certain nomic correlations associated with the task.

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

  • Braddick, O.: 1980, ‘Low-level and High-level Processes in Apparent Motion’,Vision Research 14, 519–27.

    Google Scholar 

  • Feldman, R.: 1985, ‘Reliability and Justification’,The Monist 68, 159–74.

    Google Scholar 

  • Feldman, R.: 1985a, ‘Schmitt on Reliability, Objectivity, and Justification’,Australasian Journal of Philosophy 63, 354–60.

    Google Scholar 

  • Goldman, A.: 1967, ‘A Causal Theory of Knowledge’,The Journal of Philosophy 64, 357–72.

    Google Scholar 

  • Goldman, A.: 1976, ‘Discrimination and Perceptual Knowledge’,The Journal of Philosophy 73, 771–91.

    Google Scholar 

  • Goldman, A.: 1979, ‘What is Justified Belief?’, in George Pappas (ed.),Justification and Knowledge, D. Reidel, Dordrecht, pp. 1–23.

    Google Scholar 

  • Goldman, A.: 1986,Epistemology and Cognition, Harvard University Press, Cambridge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Goldman, A.: 1988, ‘Strong and Weak Justification’,Philosophical Perspectives 2, 51–69.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pollock, J.: 1984, ‘Reliability and Justified Belief’,The Canadian Journal of Philosophy 14, 103–14.

    Google Scholar 

  • Shepard; R.: 1990,Mind Sights, New York, W. H. Freeman.

    Google Scholar 

  • Treisman, A.: 1987, ‘Features and Objects in Visual Processing’,Sciennfic American 255, 114–25.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wallis, C.: 1992, ‘Representation, Knowledge, and Structure in Computational Explanations in Cognitive Science’, Ph.D. Dissertation, University of Minnesota.

  • Wallis, C.: 1994, ‘Lottery Arguments Against Reliabilism’, unpublished manuscript.

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Wallis, C. Truth-ratios, process, task, and knowledge. Synthese 98, 243–269 (1994). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF01063943

Download citation

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF01063943

Keywords

Navigation