Abstract
In two stimulating articles Peter Klein reports the uncovering of a hitherto unnoticed connection between the two main arguments for radical skepticism (Klein 2002 and 2003). The epistemic principle on which the traditional Cartesian argument is based entails, says Klein, the epistemic principle motivating the canonical contemporary argument. If Klein is right, the two principal arguments for skepticism are more closely related than has previously been assumed to be the case. The purpose of the paper is, first of all, to bring out the structure of Klein's sometimes less than transparent reasoning. This reconstruction reveals that his central argument fails on several accounts. As a remedy, an alternative argument is presented.
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
