Standing Beliefs, Skepticism, and Some Questions about Zalabardo's Probabilistic Approach.

This paper scrutinizes José Zalabardo's proposals regarding standing knowledge, external world skepticism, and our knowledge that our beliefs are true. Central here is Zalabardo's principle PI, "S can have inferential knowledge of H based on the evidence provided by E only if S's belief in E confirms H". This principle appears vulnerable to counterexample. Adjudication of the issue requires scrutiny of Zalabardo's probabilistic theory of confirmation, and here questions arise about how Zalabardo's mathematical apparatus is meant to be applied. An alternative account of our knowledge that we are not brains in vats is offered, and a reply is offered to Zalabardo's new skeptical argument that we cannot know that our beliefs are true [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]