safety

KNOWLEDGE ESSENTIALLY BASED UPON FALSE BELIEF (pages 7–19)

Submitted by logos on Sun, 03/31/2013 - 10:44
paper title: 

KNOWLEDGE ESSENTIALLY BASED UPON FALSE BELIEF (pages 7–19)

paper type: 
article
paper author: 

Avram HILLER

paper author family name: 

HILLER

paper abstract: 

ABSTRACT: Richard Feldman and William Lycan have defended a view according to which a necessary condition for a doxastic agent to have knowledge is that the agent’s belief is not essentially based on any false assumptions. I call this the no-essential-false-assumption account, or NEFA. Peter Klein considers examples of what he calls “useful false beliefs” and alters his own account of knowledge in a way which can be seen as a refinement of NEFA. This paper shows that NEFA, even given Klein’s refinement, is subject to counterexample: a doxastic agent may possess knowledge despite having an essential false assumption. Advocates of NEFA could simply reject the intuition that the example is a case of knowledge. However, if the example is interpreted as not being a case of knowledge, then it can be used as a potential counterexample against both safety and sensitivity views of knowledge. I also provide a further case which, I claim, is problematic for all of the accounts just mentioned. I then propose, briefly, an alternative account of knowledge which handles all these cases appropriately. 

paper issue: 
11

SAVING SOSA’S SAFETY (pages 637-652)

Submitted by logos on Fri, 12/28/2012 - 11:01
paper title: 

SAVING SOSA’S SAFETY (pages 637-652)

paper type: 
debate
paper author: 

Mark McBRIDE

paper author family name: 

McBRIDE

paper abstract: 

ABSTRACT: My purpose in this paper is to (begin to) defend safety as a necessary condition on knowledge. First, I introduce Ernest Sosa’s (1999) safety condition. Second, I set up and grapple with Juan Comesaña’s recent putative counterexample to safety as a necessary condition on knowledge; Comesaña’s case forces us to consider Sosa’s updated (2002) safety condition. From such grappling a principled modification to Sosa’s (2002) safety condition emerges. Safety is safe from this, and like, attacks. 

paper issue: 
10

Powered by Drupal 6 | web development: Codrin Dinu Vasiliu

Powered by Drupal, an open source content management system
Syndicate content
© 2010 Logos & Episteme | An International Journal of Epistemology. Drupal theme by Kiwi Themes.