John Turri has recently called for a major shift in how the vast majority of philoso-phers think of knowledge. Instead of maintaining that knowledge must proceed from reliableprocesses, he urges epistemologists to move toward an “abilist” view that allows knowledgeto proceed from abilities that are not truth-conducive. More strongly, he claims to have pro-vided conclusive reasons for abandoning the idea that knowledge requires reliability. In thispaper I explain why Turri has failed to make the case for preferring abilism.
© 2001-2024 Fundación Dialnet · Todos los derechos reservados