The Pragmatism of Isaac Levi

Isaac Levi's philosophical thinking has shown remarkable stability over the years. Basically, it all started with his first book, Gambling with Truth, which outlines a research program whose key element is the decision theoretic reconstruction of epistemology. Much of the rest of his work in epistemology has been devoted to extending and implementing this original program. With one important exception, there is little in his philosophical picture that has changed radically over the years. There have been changes, to be sure, but they have taken place at the level of detail rather than at the level of fundamental principle. The main exception is the issue of fallibilism. Starting out as a fallibilist, Levi became an infallibilist in the 70s'. The problem is that the corrigibility of our view sugge sts its fallibility: if we agree, as we must, that our view may change in the future, then it seems that we are never entitled to accept as true any claims of empirical substance now. But we do accept things as true now. Levi writes, in retrospect, that in the 60s' he unwittingly solved this problem for himself " by remaining in a fog of confusion " (Levi 1984, xiv), adding that by 1971 he had reached the conclusion that corrigibility and fallibility are best kept separate and, in particular, that endorsing corrigibilism is compatible with rejecting fallibilism. The paper " Truth, fallibility and the growth of knowledge " was the first expression of t his important revision. It was accepted for publication in 1975 but not actually published until 1983. The paper was reprinted in Levi (1984). Levi is a truly systematic philosopher. The purpose of the following text accordingly is to describe his position in a way that reveals its internal coherence. I intend to do so without diving too deeply into the technical details. I want to show how arguably most of Levi's work in epistemology rests on four cornerstones: the belief-doubt model, the injunction against roadblocks in the path of inquiry, the unity of reason thesis and the commitment-performance distinction. The first three elements undoubtedly belong to the tradition of American pragmatism. The commitment-performance distinction may have some support in Dewey's work. In any case, Levi's epistemological thinking cannot be appreciated fully unless these cornerstones of his pragmatism are kept firmly in mind. This way of describing Levi's pragmatism departs somewhat from how Levi himself usually explains …