This paper argues that basic knowledge does not require the satisfaction of any evidence condition. although this position has been argued by peirce and austin, it needs further defense in the light of certain pragmatic and wittgensteinian objections to the effect that knowledge without evidence leads to either dogmatism or scepticism. i also argue the wittgenstein's position (along with dewey's) guarantees scepticism.
CITATION STYLE
Almeder, R. F. (1983). Basic Knowledge and Justification. Canadian Journal of Philosophy, 13, 115–128.
Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.