Suchergebnisse

This paper aims to argue in support of the neo-Moorean attempt(s) to solve a
skeptical paradox. It defends the thesis that neo-Mooreans retain advantages
and avoid disadvantages of rival anti-skeptical strategies - namely
epistemic contextualism. The puzzle that a radical skeptic poses is
exemplified by Nozick?s famous Brain in a Vat thought experiment, which
enables construing valid arguments consisting of jointly inconsistent but
independently plausible premises. The first and the second part of the paper
are devoted to Nozick?s conditional analysis of knowledge and De Rose?s
epistemic contextualism, both based on the sensitivity principle. Referring
to De Roses? contextualist theory, we demonstrate that the failure of
Nozick?s conditional analysis of knowledge to provide a satisfactory answer
to a skeptical paradox does not concern the sensitivity principle but rather
closure denial and embracing the so-called ?abominable conjunction?. In the
third part, we point out the weaknesses of the presumably most successful,
contextualist response to the paradox. We explain that even though DeRose?s
anti-skeptical strategy is built upon Nozick?s theory, he successfully
surmounts its difficulties. Yet it seems that as a contextualist, he
necessarily makes some concessions to a radical skeptic. Eventually, the
article introduces Black?s neo-Moorean anti-skeptical theory based on the
sensitivity principle as a strategy that makes neither concessions, nor
counterintuitive proposals.

Feminist epistemology implies an approach to the theory of knowledge, which
in its centre sets up feminist issues. The paper analyzes a recent course in
the area dealing with feminist epistemology, namely feminist empiricism.
Unlike other feminists engaged in epistemology, their goal is to keep the
basic concepts of the analytic tradition, but considered in the light of
feminist interests. Starting from Quine?s naturalized epistemology, feminist
empiricists are introducing different concepts of knowledge and the nature of
the knowers, creating a new perspective on the relationship of
sociopolitical values and scientific research. The feminist empiricist?s
advantage over feminist epistemology approaches outside the analytical
framework is precisely in accepting the naturalistic and empiricist approach
to gender biases. The aim is to evaluate how successful they are in achieving
their ideas, and whether such an approach is acceptable.

This paper delves into the use of machine learning-based systems in
decision-making processes and its implications for moral responsibility as
traditionally defined. It focuses on the emergence of responsibility gaps
and examines proposed strategies to address them. The paper aims to provide
an introductory and comprehensive overview of the ongoing debate surrounding
moral responsibility in automated decision-making. By thoroughly examining
these issues, we seek to contribute to a deeper understanding of the
implications of AI integration in society.