Study Questions for the Final Exam
Theory of Knowledge (34-254)
Dr. M. Guarini

Your final exam will consist of two questions.  One question will be come from Group A below, and one question will be taken from Group B.  Regarding the question that comes from Group A, you will have some choice: two questions will be supplied, and you will have to answer one.  Regarding the question that comes from Group B, there will be no choice: there will be one question, and you will have to answer it.

Group A

1. According to what Goldman says in "Immediate Justification and Process Reliabilism," what is Huemer's position on direct perceptual justifiedness?  How does Goldman criticize Huemer's position?  According to what Conee and Feldman say in "Evidence" (for example, section 3.3), what is the problem with the use of "seeming" as Huemer uses it?  How does Goldman explain direct perceptual justifiedness?  How do Conee and Feldman explain it? Whose view (if any) is most defensible?  Defend your position.  (This question is testing you on the independent study readings.)
    

2. What is the Sellarsian Dilemma?  Present the theories of BonJour and Lehrer on justification, and point out how they would take themselves to be engaging the dilemma.  Do you think any of either of these authors has a plausible reply?  Defend your position.
    

3. Compare and Contrast Goldman, Brandom, and Lehrer on internalism and externalism with respect to knowledge.  Who do you think has the most defensible position?  Explain.  If you think they all have seriously flawed views, defend that position.
    

Group B

1. Can a three year old child have epistemically justified beliefs?  Discuss with reference to the work of BonJour, Sosa, and Lehrer.  Defend your own position on the matter, and be sure to engage opposing points of view.  Be sure to lay out the basic commitments of each individual's theory of justification.
    

2. Brandom suggests that reliabilists (like Goldman) are trying to recentre epistemology.  What are reliabilists moving away from, and what are they moving towards?  To what extent, if any, is Brandom sympathetic to reliabilism?  How does he argue for his position? Present and evaluate his position.  Be sure to discuss what he refers to as insights and blindspots of reliabilism.
    

3. According to the instructor, what is inside-out epistemology?  Explain BonJour's theory of justification and why it is an example of inside-out epistemology.  Why is it foundationalist?  Does a foundationalist have to be an inside-out epistemologist?  Consider the views of Sosa, Brandom, and Goldman – are any of them inside-out epistemologists?  If so, why?  If not, why not?  Do you think an inside-out approach to epistemology is plausible?  Defend your position.