Further Reflections on Quasi-factivism: A Reply to Baumann (pages 207-215)

Michael J. SHAFFER

ABSTRACT: This paper is a constructive response to Peter Baumann’s comments concerning the argument from inconsistency and explosion that was originally introduced in “Can Knowledge Really be Non-factive?” Specifically, this paper deals with Baumann’s two suggestions for how quasi-factivists might avoid this argument and it shows that they are both problematic. As such, his paper extends and strengthens the case against the view that knowledge is not factive, i.e. the view that knowledge implies that what is known is true or approximately true.

application-pdf Download PDF

Check Also

Anecdotal Pluralism (pages 117-142)

Daniele BERTINI ABSTRACT: Anecdotal pluralism (AP) is the claim that, when two individuals disagree on …