Carroll's Regress and the Epistemology of Logic

Author: Philie, Patrice

Source: Philosophical Studies, Volume 134, Number 2, May 2007 , pp. 183-210(28)

Publisher: Springer

Buy & download fulltext article:

Price: $47.00 plus tax (Refund Policy)

Abstract:

On an internalist account of logical inference, we are warranted in drawing conclusions from accepted premises on the basis of our knowledge of logical laws. Lewis Carroll's regress challenges internalism by purporting to show that this kind of warrant cannot ground the move from premises to conclusion. Carroll's regress vindicates a repudiation of internalism and leads to the espousal of a standpoint that regards our inferential practice as not being grounded on our knowledge of logical laws. Such a standpoint can take two forms. One can adopt either a broadly externalist model of inference or a sceptical stance. I will attempt, in what follows, to defend a version of internalism which is not affected by the regress. The main strategy will be to show that externalism and scepticism are not satisfying standpoints to adopt with regard to our inferential practice, and then to suggest an internalist alternative.

Keywords: epistemology; externalism; inference; internalism; logic; scepticism

Document Type: Research article

DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s11098-005-7269-z

Publication date: 2007-05-01