Abstract
The purpose of this paper is to examine a version of externalist epistemology based on the notions of “conclusive reasons” and “decisive indicators”, and to decide whether it is a viable option. There are some good points to be taken from existing criticisms of this position, but my judgment is that they fail to block an extreme externalist reply suggested by Suppe. However, at the same time, I show that almost any pair of experiential state and belief can meet the condition of conclusive reasons (or decisive indicators) using stronger counterexamples. Thus, these notions are nearly trivial, and the version of externalism based on these notions is unattractive.
