| Authors |
|
| Abstract |
The relation of scepticism to infallibilism and fallibilism is a contested issue. In this paper I argue that Cartesian sceptical arguments, i.e. sceptical arguments resting on sceptical scenarios, are neither tied to infallibilism nor collapse into fallibilism. I interpret the distinction between scepticism and fallibilism as a scope distinction. According to fallibilism, each belief could be false, but according to scepticism all
beliefs could be false at the same time. However, to put this distinction to work sceptical scenarios have to be understood as ignorance-possibilities, not as error-possibilities. To show that scepticism is not tied to infallibilism I reject the principle of unrestricted relevance according to which any error- or ignorance-possibility whatsoever is relevant. Instead I argue that the sceptic should distinguish between
local and global ignorance-possibilities. Global ignorance-possibilities are relevant even though not all ignorance-possibilities are relevant. The result is a refined version of the Cartesian sceptical argument that avoids two traps other versions do not avoid.
|
| Keywords | Scepticism Infallibilism Fallibilism |
| Categories | (categorize this paper) |
| Options |
|
Download options
References found in this work BETA
View all 44 references / Add more references
Citations of this work BETA
Similar books and articles
Analytics
2013-08-30
Total views
1,229 ( #4,523 of 2,500,580 )
Recent downloads (6 months)
142 ( #4,466 of 2,500,580 )
How can I increase my downloads?

Formed in 2009, the Archive Team (not to be confused with the archive.org Archive-It Team) is a rogue archivist collective dedicated to saving copies of rapidly dying or deleted websites for the sake of history and digital heritage. The group is 100% composed of volunteers and interested parties, and has expanded into a large amount of related projects for saving online and digital history.





