English (United Kingdom)

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/featured_content/oa?rat=en

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/highlighted_journal/

Global: Zendy Plus annual

Presents the access of premium content as premium feature

Premium Content

Presents the keyphrase highlighting as premium feature

Keyphrase Highlighting

Presents the summarisation as premium feature

Summarisation

Insights

Presents the pdf analysis as premium feature

PDF Analysis

Presents the zaia usage as premium feature

ZAIA

Global: Zendy Tools annual

Global: Zendy Free Plan

Global: Zendy Tools monthly

Global: Zendy Plus monthly

Skeptics, by being skeptical about the certainty, accuracy and truth claims, defend that there are no objective accuracy or certainty; and for this reason, it is not possible to have an epistemological justification. The arguments on skepticism claiming that knowledge is not possible or proofs are inadequate in justifying knowledge have caused that skepticism has been considered as a notorious concept and sometimes it has been considered as a destructive activity. There is the idea that knowledge and certainty are possible behind these considerations. On this basis, skepticism has been conceived as the rejection of knowledge, beliefs and proofs, and therefore, the arguments of skepticism have been presented as an epistemic predicament. In this study, the arguments of whether skepticism has faced an epistemological predicament or not will be dealt with. For this purpose, the etymological investigation of skepticism will be performed, and then it will be claimed that there are two types of skepticisms, which are the excessive one and the moderate one. After skeptical arguments are defined, it will be claimed that excessive skepticism is in an epistemological predicament; however, moderate skepticism has been saved from this predicament by holding tightly to some arguments. In this way, the negative criticisms towards skepticism will have an unfair position in the face of moderate skepticism. In other words, it will appear that that the charge of skepticism with denialism is faulty and incomplete. Extended English summary is in the end of  Full Text  PDF (TURKISH)  file . Ozet Skeptikler kesinlik, dogruluk ve hakikat iddialarindan suphe duyarak nesnel bir dogrulugun ya da kesinligin olmadigini; dolayisiyla epistemolojik olarak gerekcelendirmenin de mumkun olmadigini savunmaktadir. Bilginin mumkun olmadigi ya da bilgiyi gerekcelendirmede kanitlarin yetersiz oldugu seklindeki skeptik tezler, skeptisizmin kotu bir unvanla anilmasina hatta yikici bir ugras gibi degerlendirilmesine neden olmaktadir. Bu degerlendirmelerin arkasinda bilginin ve kesinligin mumkun oldugu fikri yer almaktadir. Bu fikre dayanarak skeptisizm bilginin, inanclarin ve kanitlarin reddi gibi dusunulmekte ve buna bagli olarak skeptisizmin tezleri epistemik bir cikmaz gibi sunulmaktadir. Bu calismada skeptisizmin epistemolojik bir cikmaza girip girmedigi ele alinacaktir. Bunun icin oncelikle skeptisizmin etimolojik arastirmasi yapilacak ve daha sonra asiri ve ilimli olmak uzere iki skeptisizm turu oldugu ileri surulecektir. Skeptik argumanlar ortaya koyulduktan sonra asiri skeptisizmin epistemolojik cikmazda oldugu; ancak ilimli skeptisizmin bazi varsayimlara tutunarak bu cikmazdan kurtulabildigi iddia edilecektir. Boylece skeptisizme yonelik olumsuz elestiriler ilimli skeptisizmle haksiz bir konuma girecektir. Baska bir deyisle skeptisizmi inkarcilikla suclamanin hatali ve eksik oldugu ortaya cikacaktir.

Is skepticism an epistemological predicament? <p>Skeptisizm epistemolojik bir çıkmaz mıdır?