In defense of comprehensive epistemic conservatism

Authors

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.24310/crf.16.1.2024.14175

Keywords:

epistemic conservatism, rationality, evidence, justification

Abstract

The aim of this paper is to present an epistemic conservatism form that is comprehensive, and holding that: from that S believes p, as a successful response to their environment, p acquires a favorable epistemic status for which it is rational that the belief is maintained until overcoming evidences appear that are alternative and incompatible with p. In addition, it will investigate possible developments that can make the integral version a promising and at the same time plausible principle, to conclude that it gives rationality to our doxastic commitments through the constant improvement of cognitive skills.

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

Metrics

Metrics Loading ...

Publication Facts

Metric
This article
Other articles
Peer reviewers 
3
2.4

Reviewer profiles  N/A

Author statements

Author statements
This article
Other articles
Data availability 
N/A
16%
External funding 
N/A
32%
Competing interests 
N/A
11%
Metric
This journal
Other journals
Articles accepted 
58%
33%
Days to publication 
860
145

Indexed in

Editor & editorial board
profiles
Academic society 
N/A
Publisher 
Asociación para la promoción de la filosofía y la cultura en Málaga (FICUM) y UMAEditorial

References

Adler, J. (1990). Conservatism and tacit confirmation. Mind, 99(396), 559-570.

Adler, J. (1996). An Overlooked Argument for Epistemic Conservatism. Analysis, 56, 80-84.

Chisholm, R. (1982). The Foundations of Knowing. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press.

Christensen, D. (1994). Conservatism in Epistemology. Nous, 28, 69-89.

Christensen, D. (2007). Epistemology of Disagreement: the Good News. Philosophical Review, 116, 187-217.

Coren, D. (2018). Epistemic conservatism and bare beliefs. Synthese, 198, 743–756.

Coren, D. (2019). Evaluating epistemic virtues. Synthese, 198, 1569–1578.

Elga, A. (2007). Reflection and Disagreement. Nous, 41, 478–502.

Foley, R. (1983). Epistemic Conservationism. Philosophical Studies, 165-182.

Foley, R. (1992). The epistemology of belief and the epistemology of degrees of belief. American Philosophical Quarterly, 29(2), 111-124.

Harman, G. (1986). Change in View: Principles of Reasoning. Cambridge: MIT Press.

Harman, G. (1999). Reasoning, Meaning, and Mind. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Kvanvig, J. (1989). Conservatism and its Virtues. Synthese, 79, 143-163.

Lycan, W. (2019). On evidence in philosophy. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Lycan, W. G. (1985). Conservatism and the Data Base, en N. Rescher (Ed.), Reason and Rationality in Natural Science, Lanham: University Press of America.

Lycan, W. G. (1988). Judgement and Justification. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

McCain, K. (2008). The Virtues of Epistemic Conservatism. Synthese, 164, 185-200.

Sklar, L. (1975). Methodological conservatism. Philosophical Review, 84(3), 374-400.

Vahid, H. (2004). Varieties of Epistemic Conservatism. Synthese, 141, 97-122.

Vogel, J. (1992). Sklar on methodological conservatism. Philosophy and Phenomenological Research, 52(1), 125-131.

Williams, M. (2000). Dretske on epistemic entitlement. Philosophy and Phenomenological Research, 60(3), 607-612.

Published

2024-06-04

How to Cite

Laera, R. (2024). In defense of comprehensive epistemic conservatism. Claridades. Revista De filosofía, 16(1), 145–170. https://doi.org/10.24310/crf.16.1.2024.14175