Day 10:  Finishing Goldman & Starting Brandom

•      Goldman on Interpersonal and Intrapersonal Justification

•      The Founding Insight of Reliabilism

•      Reliabilist Recentring of Epistemology

•      Chicken Sexing and Super Blind Sight

•      Semantics and Epistemology

•      Reread Brandom’s “Insights and Blindspots of Reliabilism.”  Independent study: look at the first 15 pages of Klein’s “Useful False Beliefs” (in ENE)

Goldman on Interpersonal & Intrapersonal Justification

•      Why is intrapersonal treated as more basic than interpersonal?

–  (1) issue of the existence of other people, minds

–  (2) interpersonal reason giving depends on intrapersonal justification

–  (3) can be justified (and know) without being able to state reasons  (either due to complexity or for historical/memory reasons)

–  (4) someone could be justified even if no one else is bright enough to understand the basis of their justification

The Founding Insight of Reliabilism

•      When Brandom refers to the “justification condition” of knowledge, what is he referring to?  How does his use differ from Goldman’s?

•      What is the point of the Aztec and Toltec potsherds example?

•      According to Brandom, what is the founding insight of reliabilism?  Why does he say this?

Reliabilist Recentring of Epistemology

•      According to Brandom, why should we care about the nonaccidentalness of a true opinion or belief?

•      Brandom’s three questions (pp. 374-375)

•      How does the externalist reliabilist answer these questions?

•      On the reliabilist recentring of epistemology

•      How does Brandom answer these three questions?

•      Preliminary remark on Brandom’s rejection of the recentring of epistemology

Chicken Sexing and Super Blind Sight

•      What’s up with these examples?  Why does Brandom bring them up?

•      What does Brandom think the lesson is of examples where someone makes reliable reports but cannot give reasons to believe that they are reliable?

First Argument Against Recentring Epistemology

•      Can you imagine a community where members form beliefs only when they can give reasons for their beliefs?

•      Can you imagine a community where members never are in a position to offer reasons for their beliefs?

•      How does Brandom answer these questions?  What conclusion does he draw?

Semantics and Epistemology

•      What is semantics?

•      Why does Brandom get into semantics?

•      What is inferential/conceptual role semantics?

•      What are the implications for epistemology?