Abstract:

A common assumption within the Lottery Paradox debate isthat we are somehow confused about epistemic justification and, hence, should revise our intuitive, but a paradox-generating understanding of it. This paperrevisits that assumption. The suggestion is that the paradox stems more specificallyfrom our confusion about justification of beliefs, not justification toutcourt, since there is no Lottery Paradox in the case of justified emotions andother non-belief states. A conjecture as to what exactly might be problematic orconfusion inducing in our ordinary understanding of justified belief is exploredon the basis of some recent work on gradable adjectives.