Abstract
Is there a successful regress argument against intellectualism? In this article I defend the negative answer. I begin by defending Stanley and Williamson's (2001) critique of the contemplation regress against Noë (2005). I then identify a new argument - the employment regress - that is designed to succeed where the contemplation regress fails, and which I take to be the most basic and plausible form of a regress argument against intellectualism. However, I argue that the employment regress still fails. Drawing on the previous discussion, I criticise further regress arguments given by Hetherington (2006) and Noë (2005).
| Original language | English |
|---|---|
| Pages (from-to) | 358-388 |
| Number of pages | 31 |
| Journal | Pacific Philosophical Quarterly |
| Volume | 94 |
| Issue number | 3 |
| Early online date | 30 Jun 2013 |
| DOIs | |
| Publication status | Published - Sept 2013 |