In defense of radical empiricism Public Deposited

Analytics

Downloadable Content

Download PDF
Request Version for Screen Reader
Last Modified
  • March 21, 2019
Creator
  • Riegel, Joseph Benjamin
    • Affiliation: College of Arts and Sciences, Department of Philosophy
Abstract
  • In this paper I evaluate arguments presented by Lawrence Bonjour, Christopher Peacocke, and George Bealer which purport to show that there as an indispensable theoretical need for a priori knowledge. Bonjour and Peacocke argue that views that deny a priori knowledge - which I call Radical Empiricist views - ultimately lead to radical forms of skepticism. Bealer argues that Radical Empiricism is incoherent in the sense that it is internally inconsistent. In this paper, I evaluate each of these arguments against Radical Empiricism and I attempt to show that each is unconvincing. The upshot of my discussion is that we have no compelling reason to posit a priori knowledge
Date of publication
DOI
Resource type
Rights statement
  • In Copyright
Advisor
  • Neta, Ram
Degree granting institution
  • University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill
Language
Access
  • Open access
Parents:

This work has no parents.

Items

Thumbnail Title Date Uploaded Visibility Actions
In defense of radical empiricism 2019-04-05 Public