« Eliminativism is Counterintuitive -- So What? | Main | Phenomenal Content is Not Existential »

Comments

Dan Korman

It seems to me (and I thereby have immediate prima facie justification for believing) that Pryor's remarks don't yet commit him to a dogmatism about intuitive justification. Here, I take it, is an alternative to dogmatism: the property of beliefs based on intuitions in virtue of which they are justified is the property of being the outcome of a reliable belief-forming method. This is not dogmatism because dogmatism takes the justification-conferring property to be the property to seeming true to the believer. Proceeding via the reliable standard philosophical belief-forming method of believing what seems (intuitively) true results in justified beliefs, not because the beliefs we form seem (intuitively) true, but because standard philosophical method is a reliable belief-forming method.

Is there anything to prevent the dogmatist about perceptual justification from taking this alternative, reliabilist line on intuitive justification? (Or am I wrong to think that this is an alternative to dogmatism?)

John Bengson

Hi Dan,

Good question. I probably should have said something about that alternative in the post. Pryor says (p. 538) that his appeal to standard philosophical methodology is just a piece of "sensible philosophical conservatism": "we start with what it seems intuitively natural to say about perception, and we retain that natural view until we find objections that require us to abandon it." I find this hard to square with the suggestion that Pryor could avoid accepting dogmatism about intuitive justification by adopting a reliabilist line.

In any case, I'm tempted to think that a standard reliabilist line is not a genuine alternative to dogmatism. The reliability of x might explain why, or support the claim that, dogmatism about x is true. (Pryor, on p. 536, explicitly resists this option in the case of dogmatism about perceptual justification.) But it's not obvious that a standard reliabilist line could avoid dogmatism, as I've formulated it. But I'm open to suggestions to the contrary.

The comments to this entry are closed.

August 2011

Sun Mon Tue Wed Thu Fri Sat
  1 2 3 4 5 6
7 8 9 10 11 12 13
14 15 16 17 18 19 20
21 22 23 24 25 26 27
28 29 30 31      
Blog powered by Typepad