Directions: This assignment is due in class on Monday Nov. 20, 2006. Read the materials from the syllabus about the Causal Theory, Truth Tracking, Reliabilism, and Proper Function Theory. These are all non-evidentialist theories about knowledge and justification. By the time this assignment is due, we will have discussed at least several of these views. If you are having trouble picking a topic, I suggest that you do #2.

 

1) On p. 460 Goldman discusses an example about Abraham Lincoln. He claims that this problem presents a problem for traditional, evidentialist, theories about justification. What is the problem? How does he think defenders of evidentialist theories will respond to this problem? Must they deal with this example in the way he says? [Assigned in class on 10/25 and due on 10/27.]

 

2) On pp. 455-5 Goldman discusses knowledge of the future. Assume for the sake of argument that we can know some things about the future. Using an original example, explain how Goldman accounts for such knowledge within his causal theory. Evaluate his claims about this.

 

3) In class and in the text we considered objections to each of the non-evidentialist theories. If you think that one of the theories can be defended from one of these objections, then explain the objection and explain how you think the theory can be defended from that objection.

 

4) If you think that there is some important objection to one of the theories that we have not discussed, then state, explain, and discuss that objection.

 

5) The general theme of Ch. 5 of the text is that the theories under discussion all go wrong largely because they understate the significance of evidential considerations. Is this criticism correct? (As stated, this is a fairly broad question. If you write about this, be sure to narrow down the question to make it manageable in a short paper.)