Warrant: The Current Debate
Warrant: The Current Debate is the first in a trilogy of books written by the philosopher Alvin Plantinga on epistemology. Plantinga introduces, analyzes, and criticizes 20th-century developments in analytic epistemology, particularly the works of Roderick Chisholm, Laurence BonJour, William Alston, Alvin Goldman, and others.[1] In the 1993 book, Plantinga argues specifically that the theories of what he calls "warrant" – what many others have called justification (Plantinga draws out a difference: justification is a property of a person holding a belief while warrant is a property of a belief) – put forth by these epistemologists have systematically failed to capture in full what is required for knowledge.[2]
 | |
| Author | Alvin Plantinga |
|---|---|
| Country | United States |
| Language | English |
| Subject | Epistemology |
| Publisher | Oxford University Press |
Publication date | 1993 |
| Pages | 228 |
| ISBN | 978-0-19-507862-6 |
| 121/.6 | |
| LC Class | BD161 .P58 |
| Followed by | Warrant and Proper Function |
References
- Plantinga 1993.
- Plantinga 1993, p. 3.
Bibliography
- Plantinga, Alvin (1993). Warrant: The Current Debate. New York: Oxford University Press.
This article is issued from Wikipedia. The text is licensed under Creative Commons - Attribution - Sharealike. Additional terms may apply for the media files.