Gascoigne explores the challenge to epistemology itself and considers two contemporary responses: the turn against foundationalist epistemology in favour of more naturalistic conceptions of inquiry, and the resistance to this response by non-naturalistically inclined philosophers. This contextualization of the sceptical debate gives students a better appreciation of the methodological importance of sceptical reasoning, an analytic understanding of the structure of sceptical arguments (including an assessment of whether the theoretical burden lies with the sceptic or anti-sceptic), and an awareness of the significance of scepticism for other areas of philosophical inquiry.
Table of Contents
You are viewing the table of contents
You do not have access to this
on JSTOR. Try logging in through your institution for access.