- David Hume was a:
- By “high accessibility requirements” the internalist means:
The evidence level is so high I do not have access to it
I know, or through introspection can attain, my reasons for my beliefs
externalists do not highly cherish their epistemic obligations
all of the above
- Christopher Columbus was convinced that he discovered a route to the East Indies because it lined up with his maps and the current beliefs of his day. However, he was wrong. This example demonstrates a problem with:
A reliabilist form of justification
An evidentialist form of justification
A foundationalist form of justification
A coherentist form of justification.
- According to the presentation on skepticism, Descartes’ systematic doubt:
questioned the senses
both of the above
none of the above
- Rene Descartes was a:
- The virtue of studiousness does not take into account the proper kinds of motives for seeking knowledge.
- Which is not one of the ways that Wood says moral and intellectual virtues parallel each other?
Each are developed throughout life.
We do not grow in either of them automatically.
Each s best developed in the context of community.
They yield the same kinds of results.
- Thomas Aquinas thought that moral and intellectual virtues were closely related.
- Aristotle thought that the virtues are present naturally in all people.
- For Aristotle, the “Golden Mean” points to fixed and universal ethical norms for all people to follow.
- When the used car salesman tells Steve that the particular car he is considering purchasing has less than fifteen thousand actual miles on it, Steve is, quite naturally, a bit skeptical about this claim, particularly since the car is over ten years old and looks a little worse for wear. In exhibiting this level of doubt, Steve is expressing:
Common sense skepticism.
- To suggest that we should suspend all judgments about any claim to knowledge,
is to suggest a softer and mitigated form of skepticism in contrast to its more unmitigated expressions.
- Rather than having certainty about our beliefs, it is more likely that we have varying degrees of rational support for our beliefs.
- Hume thinks that, while we may assume connections of causality (i.e., every event has a cause), we never actually perceive a necessary connection of causality and therefore we cannot know a causal connection has actually occurred.
- When Descartes employs systematic doubt against the beliefs he holds, he discovers that:
He must be a thinking thing in order to be deceived by an evil demon, and a thinking thing can at least be certain that it is an existing thing.
In order to have doubt about anything one believes, one would at least have to be an existing thing in order to doubt, and a doubting thing can at least be certain that it is an existing thing.
He can be certain about some claims to knowledge.
All of the above.
- When we consider the way that our beliefs relate to each other, we are making a reference to
Our noetic structure.
The method of abduction.
The sensus divinitatus.
The notion of concurrence.
- Those holding to some form of externalism in rationality tend to argue that, since it is impossible for persons to have any cognitive access to the reasons and evidence that support some of a person’s beliefs, internalists cannot be right with respect to their account of justification for all beliefs.
- Select the one below that does NOT belong : The justification of one’s beliefs is a matter that deals with
Epistemic issues relating to the rationality of one’s beliefs.
A person having reasons or evidence for one’s beliefs.
Theological issues about the process of salvation.
How a person goes about formulating the evidence for a belief.
- Ginger believes that the dog she sees in her neighbor’s back yard is her own
Labrador Retriever named Sam. Since there are no other Labrador Retrievers in the neighborhood fitting the same description as Sam, and since the dog Ginger sees in her neighbor’s yard seems to recognize Ginger’s voice when she calls out to it, Ginger quite naturally believes the dog in her neighbor’s back yard is her dog Sam. It turns out, however, that the dog in her neighbor’s back yard is in fact not Ginger’s dog but the Labrador of a visiting relative of her neighbor. On an internalist account of justification, since it turns out not to be true that Ginger saw her dog Sam in her neighbor’s back yard, Ginger was not justified in believing it was her own dog in the first place.
- The problem with W. K. Clifford’s statement “It is wrong always, everywhere and
for anyone, to believe anything upon insufficient evidence” is that:
Most contemporary epistemologist agree that there are no objective moral duties.
The statement is a disguised form of externalism in justification.
As a matter of fact, we simply don’t hold beliefs based on insufficient evidence.
Many contemporary epistemologists think the statement is self-defeating.
Use the following coupon code :