Resumen de Argumentación racional sin transmisión de la justificación
Contemporary debates about scepticism, epistemic circularity and warrant transmission takes for granted the following thesis: when warrant transmission fails (so that one cannot acquire, by running an argument with warranted premises, a first warrant for its conclusion, or increase the previous warrant one had for it) the argument fails. I challenge this thesis. The discussion is illustrated with a diagnosis of Moore’s Proof of an External World. It can be seen as a good argument, even if warrant doesn’t transmit across it. In more general terms: an argument with conclusion C addressed to subject S can be cogent in the sense that the recognition that the premises entail (or make highly likely) C can foster in S the belief in C, without necessarily the warrant for C being gained (or reinforced) by such a recognition.
