A Paradox About Our Epistemic Self-Conception: Are You an Über Epistemic Superior?

International Journal for the Study of Skepticism 12 (4):285-316 (2022)
  Copy   BIBTEX

Abstract

I hope to show that each of 1, 2, and 3 are plausible, yet we can derive 4: 1. It is epistemically permissible to believe that our preferred views in multi-proposition disputes are true, or at least more likely true than not. 2. If it is epistemically permissible to believe that our preferred views in multi-proposition disputes are true, or at least more likely true than not, then it is epistemically permissible for us to believe that we are über epistemic superiors to our disagreeing colleagues in multi-proposition disputes. 3. It is not epistemically permissible to believe that we are über epistemic superiors to our disagreeing colleagues in multi-proposition disputes. 4. At least one of 1, 2, or 3, is false.

Other Versions

No versions found

Links

PhilArchive

    This entry is not archived by us. If you are the author and have permission from the publisher, we recommend that you archive it. Many publishers automatically grant permission to authors to archive pre-prints. By uploading a copy of your work, you will enable us to better index it, making it easier to find.

    Upload a copy of this work     Papers currently archived: 102,987

External links

Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server

Through your library

Similar books and articles

Analytics

Added to PP
2022-10-26

Downloads
31 (#757,370)

6 months
5 (#718,261)

Historical graph of downloads
How can I increase my downloads?

Author's Profile

Mark Walker
New Mexico State University

Citations of this work

Disagreement.Jonathan Matheson & Bryan Frances - 2018 - Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy.
A Defense of Endorsement.Will Fleisher - forthcoming - In Sanford C. Goldberg & Mark Walker, Attitude in Philosophy. Oxford University Press.

Add more citations