Against Fallibilism

Advice for Infallibilists: DIVORCE and RETREAT!

“…Some people have argued that we should then accept Scepticism, and not reject Infallibilism. According to Dodd (2011) for instance, the price for denying Infallibilism is as high as denying Scepticism; as he puts it: "even if infallibilism isn't cost free, it's cheaper that fallibilism" (Dodd 2011, p. 684) (cf. Unger 1975 for a similar line).…”

Fallibilism, Epistemic Possibility, and Epistemic Agency

“…Moore accepts it in his classic paper, "Certainty"; Hawthorne (2004, p. 111) calls it the "Epistemic Possibility Constraint"; Huemer (2007) takes the thesis that I am calling the Standard View to be entailed by his analysis of epistemic possibility. See also Stanley (2005b) and Dodd (2010). 8.…”

“…There are some who still seem to favor infallibilism, though; see Fumerton (2006, ch. 2) and Dodd (2011). See section IV below for more on the best way to understand fallibilism.…”

“…Cohen (, p. 91) says that the “acceptance of fallibilism in epistemology is virtually universal.” There are some who still seem to favor infallibilism, though; see Fumerton (, ch. 2) and Dodd (). See section iv below for more on the best way to understand fallibilism.…”

Infallibilism and Easy Counter-Examples

“…Firstly, Dodd (2007) defines infallibilism as the thesis that knowledge that p requires that the probability that p, conditional upon one's evidence, is 1. Dodd (2011) defines infallibilism as the thesis that S's knowledge that p requires that the epistemic probability that p for S be 1. These definitions diverge from the definition used in this paper.…”