Why Must Justification Guarantee Truth? Reply to Mizrahi

Logos and Episteme 10 (4):445-447 (2019)
  Copy   BIBTEX

Abstract

This reply provides further grounds to doubt Mizrahi’s argument for an infallibilist theory of knowledge. It is pointed out that the fact that knowledge requires both truth and justification does not entail that the level of justification required for knowledge be sufficient to guarantee truth. In addition, an argument presented by Mizrahi appears to equivocate with respect to the interpretation of the phrase “p cannot be false”.

Other Versions

No versions found

Similar books and articles

Factivity or Grounds? Comment on Mizrahi.Howard Sankey - 2019 - Logos and Episteme 10 (3):333-4.
Factivity and Epistemic Certainty: A Reply to Sankey.Moti Mizrahi - 2019 - Logos and Episteme 10 (4):443-444.
Knowledge Doesn’t Require Epistemic Certainty.James Simpson - 2019 - Logos and Episteme 10 (4):449-450.
Kantian Fallibilism: Knowledge, Certainty, Doubt.Andrew Chignell - 2021 - Midwest Studies in Philosophy 45:99-128.
Getting Gettier Right: Reply to Mizrahi.Philip Atkins - 2017 - Logos and Episteme 8 (3):347-357.
Gettier Unscathed for Now.John C. Duff - 2022 - Logos and Episteme 13 (3):317-323.

Analytics

Added to PP
2019-12-01

Downloads
548 (#50,692)

6 months
165 (#24,028)

Historical graph of downloads
How can I increase my downloads?

Author's Profile

Howard Sankey
University of Melbourne

Citations of this work

Add more citations

References found in this work

Factivity or Grounds? Comment on Mizrahi.Howard Sankey - 2019 - Logos and Episteme 10 (3):333-4.
Factivity and Epistemic Certainty: A Reply to Sankey.Moti Mizrahi - 2019 - Logos and Episteme 10 (4):443-444.

Add more references