Epistemic Catastrophe

Epistemic Catastrophe #

• Belief forming methods systematically mislead us and are therefore unreliable
• Stronger argument than Hume’s Problem

Example in Natural Selection #

R = our cognitive faculties are reliable N = naturalism (not created by God) E = our faculties are the product of natural selection

Question: what is P(R | N & E)? #

Argument: the probability of reliability given naturalism is true is very low. (Plantinga) #

• Behaviors are derived from a collection of beliefs, desires
• Natural selection only cares for behaviors — not underlying causes
• Natural selection thus can produce unreliable belief forming methods as long as they produce the right behaviors
  • ex: belief that sun rises/sets rather than Earth rotating

Additionally: #

• We use cognitive faculties to determine the theory E.
  • E is an unreliable belief.
  • Cognitive instability: it is impossible to believe a theory that suggests that our belief forming methods are unreliable.

Defeaters #

Definition: anything that weakens/refutes an argument

• 2 types: undercutting, rebutting

Diagram:

• Claim: “it’s raining”
  • Supporting: “news says it’s raining”
  • “look outside, not raining” → Rebutting defeater
  • “news source is unreliable” → Undercutting defeater

Rebutting defeater #

• direct evidence against contention

Undercutting defeater #

• indirect evidence by refuting a supporting argument

Cognitive instability ⇒ an argument undercuts itself #

Formal definition: when it is impossible to rationally believe a theory #

• a claim itself says it is likely to be false