Keith DeRose pointed out a while ago on Certain Doubts that the titles of the essays in this collection form a series of yes/no questions that we can use as a little diagnostic test to put epistemologists into boxes. So for what it's worth I'm going to follow Clayton Littlejohn's example and list my answers here.
1. Is Knowledge Closed under Known Entailment?
2. Is Knowledge Contextual?
Probably, in at least one of the senses that could be intended.
3. Can Skepticism Be Refuted?
Nope, but that's not a problem.
4. Is There A Priori Knowledge?
I expect so, but if so it'll be empirically grounded - and no, 'a priori' doesn't mean 'non-empirical' :)
5. Is Infinitism the Solution to the Regress Problem?
6. Can Beliefs Be Justified through Coherence Alone?
7. Is There Immediate Justification?
Probably, though we'll have to be really careful spelling out what that means.
8. Does Perceptual Experience Have Conceptual Content?
Is it structured in a way that is mirrored by our concepts? Yes. Does it have content which is actually shaped by concepts (i.e. is it conceptualized): some does, but not all of it.
9. Is Justification Internal?
10. Is Truth the Primary Epistemic Goal?
11. Is Justified Belief Responsible Belief?
If I'm going to borrow terminology from action-talk, I'd rather say 'appropriate' than 'responsible'.