Evidentialism: Essays in Epistemology

by Earl Conee, Richard Feldman

Evidentialism is a theory of knowledge whose essence is the traditional idea that the justification of factual knowledge is entirely a matter of evidence. Earl Conee and Richard Feldman present the definitive exposition and defence of this much-contested theory. They argue that evidentialism is an asset virtually everywhere in epistemology, from getting started legitimately to refuting skepticism. The volume collects the authors' renowned work on the topic and adds substantial new material, making it the prime resource in evidentialism for all epistemologists.

Genres: Philosophy

332 pages, Hardcover

First published January 1, 2004

Reviews

[Kramer Thompson · Rating 4 out of 5]

This was possibly the first epistemology book to get me really curious and excited about various epistemological problems (for instance, the value of knowledge, the generality problem, and the truth connection). Conee and Feldman make a compelling case for the truth of evidentialism, and I find the view very intuitively satisfying.

It's hard to assess too deeply based on just this volume, which is focused more on discussing how evidentialism can solve other problems than on defending evidentialism from potential rebuttal. I also would have enjoyed them engaging more with the Gettier problem, which they seem to dismiss as something outside the remit of evidentialism to solve (it seems as though they think that Gettier problems are unrelated to justification, whereas evidentialism is an account of epistemic justification). I don't know if I find this entirely satisfying.

Still, I found this well worth reading and would recommend it to anyone interested in/working on epistemology.

[Matt · Rating 4 out of 5]

This book is a collection of essays (most or maybe all previously published) by Richard Feldman and Earl Conee. Together, these essays present a compelling case for the version of internalist epistemology known as Evidentialism.

"I liked it so much, I wrote a Master's thesis to demonstrate that it was wrong." -- Anon.

[Amanda Tipton · Rating 4 out of 5]

A decent intermediate account of evidentialism as a theory of knowledge and justification, as compiled by two important figures in contemporary epistemology. However, at times, the individual essays fall short of fully addressing the topics as expected from essay/chapter titles. Some reworking was done during compilation to string these individual essays into one cohesive work. But the book would have felt more complete and comprehensive if it had been written as such rather than being the compilation of the works of two full careers that it truly is.

[Shahdah Mahhouk · Rating 4 out of 5]

Interesting read. They did nice job in illustration of their positive view but not the best when it comes to reply to objections

[Cain S. · Rating 5 out of 5]

This is how "arguments" are made.