Day 12: The Social Articulation of the Space of Reasons

      Semantics and Epistemology

      The Conceptual Blindspot of Reliabilism

      Reliabilism and Naturalism

      Blindspots and Insights

      Brandom on the Social Articulation of Reasons

      Read ENE: 63 – 82 (Independent Study)

 

Semantics and Epistemology

      Semantics and the belief condition:

  According to Brandom, what is a key difference between mere reliable indicators (iron filings, landmines, tree rings…) and believers?

  What epistemic conclusion does Brandom draw from how he answers the preceding question?

 

The Conceptual Blind Spot of Reliabilism

      According to Brandom, what is the conceptual blind spot of reliabilism?

      What does Brandom say about examples of proper believers who have arrived at a true belief using a reliable process or method but are unaware of their reliability?  (I.e. what does Brandom say about the founding insight of reliabilism?)

 

Reliabilism and Naturalism

      What are people talking about when they talk about naturalizing epistemology?

      In what sense are reliabilists interested in naturalizing epistemology?

      What is the point of the barn facades example?  What is “Goldman’s Insight”?

      How does Brandom use Goldman’s insight against Goldman’s reliabilism?

      The “problem of the reference class” or the “generality problem”

 

Blind Spots and Insights

      According to Brandom:

      What is the conceptual blind spot of reliabilism?

      What is the naturalistic blind spot of reliabilism?

      What is the founding insight of reliabilism?

      What is Goldman’s Insight?

      What is the implicit insight of reliabilism?

 

Brandom on the Social Articulation of Reasons

      According to Brandom, what does knowledge attribution involve?

      What is commitment?

      What is entitlement?

      What is endorsement?

      Key to the above is the difference between assessor/attributor of knowledge and the subject/target of knowledge attribution