Suppose we wonder whether we should trust the deliverances of our basic epistemic competences. If those are indeed our basic competences, then in order properly to satisfy our curiosity we will inevitably rely on one or more of them. So, either we squelch our curiosity or we will have to fall into the circularity or regress to which the skeptic objects.

If we have a better understanding of knowledge than we do of such justification or competence, then we can explain the latter through the former.

Flourishing is properly the main human end, and flourishing is activity of soul that succeeds in accord with virtue.

When the risk of failure is too high, the right choice is to forbear.

Ultimately, my more significant agreement is with a virtue tradition that features Aristotle and Descartes.

Success is better than failure; an attempt is a better attempt, it is better as an attempt, if competent than if incompetent; and it is better to succeed through competence - aptly - than through sheer luck.

Suppose we wonder whether we should trust the deliverances of our basic epistemic competences. If those are indeed our basic competences, then in order properly to satisfy our curiosity we will inevitably rely on one or more of them. So, either we squelch our curiosity or we will have to fall into the circularity or regress to which the skeptic objects.