Abstract Fogelin claims that when he and others reflect on how we disregard uneliminated but eliminable defeaters while making knowledge claims in everyday life, our level of scrutiny rises, and we are inclined to give up those claims to know. This essay responds that a Pyrrhonist should resist this inclination and retain everyday knowledge claims. The possibilities which Fogelin classifies as uneliminated but eliminable defeators are actually eliminated by everyday evidence that we possess. As a result, Pyrrhonism is said to depend on other defeaters that are uneliminable, and which do not raise the level of scrutiny or undermine everyday knowledge claims as readily as Fogelin suggests.