It has been widely argued that reasons for a belief come in degrees but not much literature has focused on the idea that defeaters for justification toward those beliefs also come in degrees. The aim of this paper is to explore epistemic defeasibility and construct a taxonomy for epistemic defeaters. This paper argues that epistemic defeaters undergo an evolutionary process before becoming what they are commonly labeled, such as rebutting and undercutting. I argue that within some stages of this process, there can be different degrees of defeat. This paper focuses on defeaters for justification, expands on the account of partial defeaters and offers a solution to reliabilism’s problem with defeat. The main aim of this taxonomy is to provide a framework that allows (most) epistemic theories to accept solely on the basis of epistemic defeasibility.
","abstract_html":"<p>It has been widely argued that reasons for a belief come in degrees but not much literature has focused on the idea that defeaters for justification toward those beliefs also come in degrees. The aim of this paper is to explore epistemic defeasibility and construct a taxonomy for epistemic defeaters. This paper argues that epistemic defeaters undergo an evolutionary process before becoming what they are commonly labeled, such as rebutting and undercutting. I argue that within some stages of this process, there can be different degrees of defeat. This paper focuses on defeaters for justification, expands on the account of partial defeaters and offers a solution to reliabilism’s problem with defeat. The main aim of this taxonomy is to provide a framework that allows (most) epistemic theories to accept solely on the basis of epistemic defeasibility. </p>","abstract_has_math":false,"creators":["Nicolas, Erica"],"institution":null,"degree_name":"Master of Arts in Philosophy (MA)","degree_level":"Thesis","degree_discipline":null,"degree_department":null,"school":null,"contributors":["Funkhouser, Eric M.","Minar, Edward H."],"advisors":["Senor, Thomas D."],"committee_chairs":[],"committee_members":[],"year":2021,"date_issued":"2021-12-01T08:00:00Z","date_published":"2021-12-01T08:00:00Z","updated_at":"2026-07-24T00:58:26Z","subjects":["Defeat","Defeaters","Epistemic Defeasibility","Epistemic Defeaters","Epistemology","Taxonomy","Comparative Philosophy"],"languages":[],"rights":[],"rights_urls":[],"identifier_entries":[]},"links":{"outbound_url":"https://scholarworks.uark.edu/etd/4321","outbound_label":"Repository record","outbound_source":"dc:identifier"},"metadata_groups":[{"id":"people","label":"People","entries":[{"key":"dc:contributor","label":"Contributor","values":["Funkhouser, Eric M.","Minar, Edward H."]},{"key":"dc:contributor.advisor","label":"Advisor","values":["Senor, Thomas D."]},{"key":"dc:creator","label":"Author","values":["Nicolas, Erica"]}]},{"id":"academic_context","label":"Academic Context","entries":[{"key":"dc:date","label":"Dc Date","values":["2021"]},{"key":"dc:date.available","label":"Dc Date Available","values":["2024-02-06T08:00:00Z"]},{"key":"thesis:degree_level","label":"Degree Level","values":["Thesis"]},{"key":"thesis:degree_name","label":"Degree Name","values":["Master of Arts in Philosophy (MA)"]}]},{"id":"subjects_keywords","label":"Subjects and Keywords","entries":[{"key":"dc:subject","label":"Dc Subject","values":["Defeat","Defeaters","Epistemic Defeasibility","Epistemic Defeaters","Epistemology","Taxonomy","Comparative Philosophy"]}]},{"id":"identifiers","label":"Identifiers","entries":[{"key":"dc:identifier","label":"Identifier","values":["https://scholarworks.uark.edu/etd/4321"]}]},{"id":"additional","label":"Additional Metadata","entries":[{"key":"dc:description.abstract","label":"Abstract","values":["It has been widely argued that reasons for a belief come in degrees but not much literature has focused on the idea that defeaters for justification toward those beliefs also come in degrees. The aim of this paper is to explore epistemic defeasibility and construct a taxonomy for epistemic defeaters. This paper argues that epistemic defeaters undergo an evolutionary process before becoming what they are commonly labeled, such as rebutting and undercutting. I argue that within some stages of this process, there can be different degrees of defeat. This paper focuses on defeaters for justification, expands on the account of partial defeaters and offers a solution to reliabilism’s problem with defeat. The main aim of this taxonomy is to provide a framework that allows (most) epistemic theories to accept solely on the basis of epistemic defeasibility.
"]},{"key":"dc:title","label":"Title","values":["The Evolution of Defeaters: A Taxonomy"]}]}],"canonical_facts":{"dc:contributor":["Funkhouser, Eric M.","Minar, Edward H."],"dc:contributor.advisor":["Senor, Thomas D."],"dc:creator":["Nicolas, Erica"],"dc:date":["2021"],"dc:date.available":["2024-02-06T08:00:00Z"],"dc:description.abstract":["It has been widely argued that reasons for a belief come in degrees but not much literature has focused on the idea that defeaters for justification toward those beliefs also come in degrees. The aim of this paper is to explore epistemic defeasibility and construct a taxonomy for epistemic defeaters. This paper argues that epistemic defeaters undergo an evolutionary process before becoming what they are commonly labeled, such as rebutting and undercutting. I argue that within some stages of this process, there can be different degrees of defeat. This paper focuses on defeaters for justification, expands on the account of partial defeaters and offers a solution to reliabilism’s problem with defeat. The main aim of this taxonomy is to provide a framework that allows (most) epistemic theories to accept solely on the basis of epistemic defeasibility.
"],"dc:identifier":["https://scholarworks.uark.edu/etd/4321"],"dc:subject":["Defeat","Defeaters","Epistemic Defeasibility","Epistemic Defeaters","Epistemology","Taxonomy","Comparative Philosophy"],"dc:title":["The Evolution of Defeaters: A Taxonomy"],"thesis:degree_level":["Thesis"],"thesis:degree_name":["Master of Arts in Philosophy (MA)"]},"updated_at":"2026-07-24T00:58:26Z"}