Has Jonathan Bernier Rescued Critical Realism?

In: Journal for the Study of the Historical Jesus
Stanley E. Porter McMaster Divinity College, 1280 Main Street West, Hamilton, onL8S 4K1, Canada,

Search for other papers by Stanley E. Porter in
Current site
Google Scholar
Andrew W. Pitts Arizona Christian University, 2625 E. Cactus Road, Phoenix, AZ 85032 USA,

Search for other papers by Andrew W. Pitts in
Current site
Google Scholar
Download Citation Get Permissions

Access options

Get access to the full article by using one of the access options below.

Institutional Login

Log in with Open Athens, Shibboleth, or your institutional credentials

Login via Institution


Buy instant access (PDF download and unlimited online access):


Jonathan Bernier recently responded to Stanley Porter and Andrew Pitts’ article on epistemology in jshj . In this rejoinder, Porter and Pitts expose Bernier’s perpetual failure to understand the central terminology in this debate. Their response to Bernier reveals his clear confusion surrounding technical (even if basic) philosophical nomenclature in contemporary epistemology. Consequently, Bernier turns out to be just as committed to internalism as those he attempts to rescue from it. Their biggest disappointment, however, turns upon Bernier’s inability to engage the central argument of their original article. Their case rested entirely upon the crippling Gettier-style counterexamples to internalism and, by extension, critical realism. Yet, Gettier never makes an appearance in Bernier’s article. One can only speculate why Bernier would write an article-length response that neglects to address this argument. Whatever the cause, this oversight deeply undermines Bernier’s entire project by leaving Porter and Pitts’ original argument unscathed and firmly intact.

Content Metrics

All Time Past Year Past 30 Days
Abstract Views 301 59 5
Full Text Views 241 6 2
PDF Views & Downloads 84 14 4