Status Updates From Epistemology: An Anthology ...

Greco's version of VE would consider victims of an evil deceiver to have the same epistemic status as people who countenance a norm of forming beliefs according to anti-induction. Seems sus.

“The serious business of science has to do not with knowledge per se; but rather, with the elimination of possibilities through the evidence of perception, memory, etc., and with the changes that one's belief system would (or might or should) undergo under the impact of such eliminations.”

Nozick grants the skeptic that the nature of the actual world is uncertain, then proceeds to define knowledge with reference to the actual world. Seems to me there are two ways to understand this apparent self-own. There's the silly way, which privileges hypotheses and makes it theoretically possible to 'know' that one is a brain in a vat. (Cont'd in comments.)

Starting to think this anthology could do with a little more abridgment. How many slightly different overviews of the basic foundationalism vs. coherentism arguments do we really need?