Reply to Duncan Pritchard and John Campbell

Analysis 69 (2):325-333 (2009)
  Copy   BIBTEX

Abstract

An epistemological how-possible question asks how knowledge, or knowledge of some specific kind, is possible. The main contention of Duncan Pritchard‟s stimulating comments is that what I call „explanatory minimalism‟ appears to offer us just what we are seeking when we ask such a question. This looks like a problem for me given that I defend a version of explanatory anti-minimalism. Pritchard outlines a version of minimalism inspired by the writings of John McDowell and does not find it obvious that this position is lacking in any relevant respect. Nor do I. My minimalism is moderate rather than extreme but Pritchard‟s objections to anti-minimalism are objections to extreme anti-minimalism. Indeed, his comments do not seem to me to have any direct bearing on what I take to be the fundamental disagreement between minimalism and anti-minimalism.

Other Versions

No versions found

Analytics

Added to PP
2009-04-11

Downloads
286 (#150,093)

6 months
36 (#234,303)

Historical graph of downloads
How can I increase my downloads?

Author's Profile

Quassim Cassam
University of Warwick

Citations of this work

No citations found.

Add more citations

References found in this work

P.William Graig & J. Moreland - 2005 - Vida Nova.
Knowledge and Its Limits.Timothy Williamson - 2005 - Philosophy and Phenomenological Research 70 (2):452-458.
Knowledge and its Limits.L. Horsten - 2000 - Tijdschrift Voor Filosofie 64 (1):200-201.
The significance of philosophical scepticism.Barry Stroud - 1984 - New York: Oxford University Press.
Knowledge and Its Limits.Timothy Williamson - 2003 - Philosophical Quarterly 53 (210):105-116.

View all 25 references / Add more references