#externalists

It's about epistemology, approx. 4 pages 

Here's the assignment:

The assignment is to explain how Bergmann (in Chapter 5 of his book) attempts to undermine internalist versions of the same evidence principle (and therefore a key intuition behind anti-externalist counter-examples), how he thinks that doing this provides support for his own “proper function” account, and how he thinks his proper function account provides the right answers in cases where either intrnalists (like BonJour) or externalist reliabilists get things wrong. Be sure to explain how “demon world” and “clairvoyant” cases based on the same evidence principle are supposed to be (internalist) objections to externalist reliablism, and how Bergmann’s own examples and arguments are supposed to undermine the internalist element of these objections even while accounting for the cases they are based on (that is, being able to explain why a subject in a “demon world” is indeed justified according to the proper function view). You should include your own evaluation of Bergmann’s position. Do you find his counter-example against necessity/same evidence plausible or not and why?