What is Justified Credence?

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle (Academic Journal)peer-review

226 Downloads (Pure)

Abstract

In this paper, we seek a reliabilist account of justified credence. Reliabilism about justified beliefs comes in two varieties: process reliabilism and indicator reliabilism. Existing accounts of reliabilism about justified credence comes in the same two varieties: Jeff Dunn (2015) proposes a version of process reliabilism, while Weng Hong Tang (2016) offers a version of indicator reliabilism. As we will see, both face the same objection. If they are right about what justification is, it is mysterious why we care about justification, for neither of the accounts explains how justification is connected to anything of epistemic value. We will call this the Connection Problem. I begin by describing Dunn's process reliabilism and Tang's indicator reliabilism. I argue that, understood correctly, they are, in fact, extensionally equivalent. That is, Dunn and Tang reach the top of the same mountain, albeit by different routes. However, I argue that both face the Connection Problem. In response, I offer my own version of reliabilism, which is both process and indicator, and I argue that it solves that problem. Furthermore, I show that it is also extensionally equivalent to Dunn's reliabilism and Tang's. Thus, I reach the top of the same mountain as well.
Original languageEnglish
Number of pages15
JournalEpisteme
Early online date4 Dec 2018
DOIs
Publication statusE-pub ahead of print - 4 Dec 2018

Fingerprint Dive into the research topics of 'What is Justified Credence?'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this