The basing relation and the impossibility of the debasing demon

Bondy, P. and Carter, J. A. (2018) The basing relation and the impossibility of the debasing demon. American Philosophical Quarterly, 55(3), p. 203.

Bondy, P. and Carter, J. A. (2018) The basing relation and the impossibility of the debasing demon. American Philosophical Quarterly, 55(3), p. 203.

[img]
Preview
Text
136258.pdf - Accepted Version

250kB

Abstract

Descartes’ demon is a deceiver: the demon makes things appear to you other than as they really are. However, as Descartes famously pointed out in the Second Meditation, not all knowledge is imperilled by this kind of deception. You still know you are a thinking thing. Perhaps, though, there is a more virulent demon in epistemic hell, one from which none of our knowledge is safe. Jonathan Schaffer (2010) thinks so. The “Debasing Demon” he imagines threatens knowledge not via the truth condition on knowledge, but via the basing condition. This demon can cause any belief to seem like it’s held on a good basis, when it’s really held on a bad basis. Several recent critics (Brueckner (2011), Conee (2015), Ballantyne & Evans (2013)) grant Schaffer the possibility of such a debasing demon, and argue that the skeptical conclusion doesn’t follow. By contrast, we argue that on any plausible account of the epistemic basing relation, the “debasing demon” is impossible. Our argument for why this is so gestures, more generally, to the importance of avoiding common traps by embracing mistaken assumptions about what it takes for a belief to be based on a reason.

Item Type:Articles
Status:Published
Refereed:Yes
Glasgow Author(s) Enlighten ID:Carter, Dr Joseph
Authors: Bondy, P., and Carter, J. A.
Subjects:B Philosophy. Psychology. Religion > B Philosophy (General)
College/School:College of Arts > School of Humanities > Philosophy
Journal Name:American Philosophical Quarterly
Publisher:University of Illinois Press
ISSN:0003-0481
ISSN (Online):2152-1123
Published Online:01 July 2018
Copyright Holders:Copyright © 2019 University of Illinois Press
First Published:First published in American Philosophical Quarterly 53(3):203
Publisher Policy:Reproduced in accordance with the publisher copyright policy

University Staff: Request a correction | Enlighten Editors: Update this record