writing assignment 6 - played it enough times. When anyone...

Info iconThis preview shows pages 1–2. Sign up to view the full content.

View Full Document Right Arrow Icon
Explanationism claims that a belief can be justified if it is come upon by an explanatory inference. However, there are some objections against this account about whether our beliefs about the external world are justified. The question is whether or not if it is reasonable to accept the best explanation as true because it could be just as reasonable to accept the best explanation as derived solely from experience. For example, you decide that you want to buy a lottery ticket every day, just as you have bought them every day for the past year. You have yet to win, but you still continue to buy the tickets. The best explanation here is that you believe that you are never going to win, based on your past experiences with the lottery. The objection to the explanationist’s account states that if the best explanation of this fact is actually false, you will eventually win the lottery if you have
Background image of page 1

Info iconThis preview has intentionally blurred sections. Sign up to view the full version.

View Full DocumentRight Arrow Icon
Background image of page 2
This is the end of the preview. Sign up to access the rest of the document.

Unformatted text preview: played it enough times. When anyone buys a lottery ticket, they do not expect to win it even in the slightest chance. However, someone always does end up winning, which would provide an objection to the best explanation of never believing to win this lottery. The explanationist would respond to this by stating that explanationism gives a natural description of so many of the inferences we actually make, such as inferring that we will not win the lottery. The explanationist would say that they dont know whether or not they will win the lottery, they just dont believe they will. For them, evidence for the best explanation is what they explain, and their explanations are what they infer from that evidence, because they are satisfying. As an explanationist, we are not assuming, but inferring that we will not win this lottery based on evidence from prior experiences....
View Full Document

This note was uploaded on 04/13/2010 for the course ECON 330 taught by Professor Minetti during the Fall '08 term at Michigan State University.

Page1 / 2

writing assignment 6 - played it enough times. When anyone...

This preview shows document pages 1 - 2. Sign up to view the full document.

View Full Document Right Arrow Icon
Ask a homework question - tutors are online