Assessing Conclusions in Light of Multiple Arguments

A proposition is unfounded unless we have some reason to believe it, and unless it is the sort of proposition that we can know to be true by direct observation or in some other way, we only have reason to believe it if we have an argument for it. Let us put aside the propositions that we can know independent of argument and consider what epistemic status propositions

that require arguments have in different circumstances.

We have already said that such propositions are unfounded if we have no arguments for them. On the other end of the spectrum, if we have a proof of a proposition, it is certain, and we should regard it as knowledge. In between these extremes are propositions for which we have inconclusive arguments. They qualify as possible or probable, depending on the strength of the arguments. Finally, there are propositions that we have arguments against, and these arguments may prove the falsehood of the proposition or establish it with some lesser degree of probability.

So far, we have been thinking of these arguments one by one, but when a proposition is controversial, there are usually multiple arguments concerning it, some of them trying to establish it and others trying to refute it. In order to assess these propositions—to determine their epistemic status—we need to consider all of these arguments and that raises some questions that we have not yet addressed and will need to take up now.