Talk:Defeater

This article gets the topic completely wrong. Defeaters act on justifications. Say that an agent S takes some piece of evidence, E1, as being a justification for a proposition P. Then an undercutting defeater is a piece of evidence, E2, that undermines the justification relation between E1 and P1, so that E1+E2 does not justify P. An opposing defeater is a piece of evidence, E3, that S takes as a justification for not-P, so that E1+E3 justifies P and not-P (ie, E1+E3 justifies an incoherence, although (E1+E2)+E3 does not). — Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.42.89.132 (talk) 15:42, 15 June 2012 (UTC)

I added an introduction and some examples. I followed the comment by 68.42.89.132 and reformulated the issue in terms of justification and evidence. I also removed the paragraph on "opposing defeaters" since (according to the sources that I'm aware of) it is just another term for rebutting defeaters. The article now has footnotes and references so I removed the maintenance templates.Phlsph7 (talk) 11:51, 14 October 2020 (UTC)