Paper #4

Theory of Knowledge

Prof. McCormick

Write a paper on one of the two following topics:

1.  In "What Happens to Reliabilism When It is Liberated from the Propositional Attitudes," Paul Churchland argues for a version of reliabilism without beliefs.  That is, humans have knowledge, but they don't have beliefs.  What is Churchland's arguments regarding the nature of knowledge?  What is it if there are no beliefs?  What are the implications for epistemology if Churchland is correct?  Do you see any problems with Churchland's argument or position?  Critically evaluate his argument.  The article is in the WebCT "Some Research Paper Articles" Folder. 

2.  On page 194 (chapter 11) of Warrant and Proper Function, Alvin Plantinga gives a general statement of his position concerning warrant:

"A belief B has warrant for you if and only if (1) the cognitive faculties involved in the production of B are functioning properly (and this is to include the relevant defeater systems as well as those systems, if any, that provide propositional inputs to the system in question); (2) your cognitive environment is sufficiently similar to the one for which your cognitive faculties are designed; (3) the triple of the design plan governing the production of the belief in question involves, as purpose or function, the production of true beliefs (and the same goes for elements of the design plan governing the production of input beliefs to the system in question); and (4) the design plan is a good one:  that is, there is a high statistical or objective probability that a belief that is produced in accordance with the relevant segment of the design plan in that sort of environment is true."

He also states a similar, early version of the principle on page 19. 

What does this principle mean?  Why is each requirement necessary in order for us to have epistemic warrant?  Explain and motivate each clause.  Plantinga gives examples to illustrate each part of the principle.  Consider those examples, but give some of your own that better illustrate the need for the clause.  Consider these questions:  Are there any counter examples to his principle where one would be warranted but his conditions are not met?  Is this a reliabilist theory? Is this an externalist theory of justification?  Is this a naturalized theory of justification?    

Your paper should be at least 3 pages, typed, double-spaced, and it should follow the department writing guidelines:  http://www.csus.edu/phil/req/writing.htm