Why Anti-Luck Virtue Epistemology has no luck with closure

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Abstract

In Part I, this paper argues that Duncan Pritchard's version of safety is incompatible with closure. In Part II I argue for an alternative theory that fares much better. Part I begins by reviewing past arguments concerning safety's problems with closure. After discussing both their inadequacies and Pritchard's response to them, I offer a modified criticism immune to previous shortcomings. I conclude Part I by explaining how Pritchard's own arguments make my critique possible. Part II argues that most modal theories of knowledge will run into problems similar to those found in Pritchard's Anti-Luck Virtue Epistemology. I hence offer my own theory grounded in risk assessment and explain why and how it does much better.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)493-515
Number of pages23
JournalLogos and Episteme
Volume8
Issue number4
StatePublished - Dec 1 2017
Externally publishedYes

Fingerprint

Safety
Luck
Virtue Epistemology
Closure
Reviewing
Criticism
Risk Assessment
Grounded Theory
Theory of Knowledge

Keywords

  • Barns
  • Closure
  • Risk. Edmund Gettier
  • Safety

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Philosophy

Cite this

Why Anti-Luck Virtue Epistemology has no luck with closure. / Priest, Maura.

In: Logos and Episteme, Vol. 8, No. 4, 01.12.2017, p. 493-515.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

@article{ea0187822d3c4ec0b269b0651516eac2,
title = "Why Anti-Luck Virtue Epistemology has no luck with closure",
abstract = "In Part I, this paper argues that Duncan Pritchard's version of safety is incompatible with closure. In Part II I argue for an alternative theory that fares much better. Part I begins by reviewing past arguments concerning safety's problems with closure. After discussing both their inadequacies and Pritchard's response to them, I offer a modified criticism immune to previous shortcomings. I conclude Part I by explaining how Pritchard's own arguments make my critique possible. Part II argues that most modal theories of knowledge will run into problems similar to those found in Pritchard's Anti-Luck Virtue Epistemology. I hence offer my own theory grounded in risk assessment and explain why and how it does much better.",
keywords = "Barns, Closure, Risk. Edmund Gettier, Safety",
author = "Maura Priest",
year = "2017",
month = "12",
day = "1",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "8",
pages = "493--515",
journal = "Logos and Episteme",
issn = "2069-0533",
publisher = "Gheorghe Zane Institute for Economic and Social Research, Romanian Academy, Iasi Branch",
number = "4",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Why Anti-Luck Virtue Epistemology has no luck with closure

AU - Priest, Maura

PY - 2017/12/1

Y1 - 2017/12/1

N2 - In Part I, this paper argues that Duncan Pritchard's version of safety is incompatible with closure. In Part II I argue for an alternative theory that fares much better. Part I begins by reviewing past arguments concerning safety's problems with closure. After discussing both their inadequacies and Pritchard's response to them, I offer a modified criticism immune to previous shortcomings. I conclude Part I by explaining how Pritchard's own arguments make my critique possible. Part II argues that most modal theories of knowledge will run into problems similar to those found in Pritchard's Anti-Luck Virtue Epistemology. I hence offer my own theory grounded in risk assessment and explain why and how it does much better.

AB - In Part I, this paper argues that Duncan Pritchard's version of safety is incompatible with closure. In Part II I argue for an alternative theory that fares much better. Part I begins by reviewing past arguments concerning safety's problems with closure. After discussing both their inadequacies and Pritchard's response to them, I offer a modified criticism immune to previous shortcomings. I conclude Part I by explaining how Pritchard's own arguments make my critique possible. Part II argues that most modal theories of knowledge will run into problems similar to those found in Pritchard's Anti-Luck Virtue Epistemology. I hence offer my own theory grounded in risk assessment and explain why and how it does much better.

KW - Barns

KW - Closure

KW - Risk. Edmund Gettier

KW - Safety

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85041034114&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=85041034114&partnerID=8YFLogxK

M3 - Article

AN - SCOPUS:85041034114

VL - 8

SP - 493

EP - 515

JO - Logos and Episteme

JF - Logos and Episteme

SN - 2069-0533

IS - 4

ER -