Tag Archives: backward clock

THE RESURRECTION SHUFFLE: TRACKING THEORIES AND BACKWARD CLOCKS (pages 207-222)

Murray CLARKE and Fred ADAMS ABSTRACT: Several years ago, John Williams posted his final response to Clarke, Adams and Barker in an ongoing debate about the status of Robert Nozick’s truth-tracking account of propositional knowledge and Fred Dretske’s early “Conclusive Reasons” account of knowledge. In this paper, we respond directly to his “Still Stuck on the Backward Clock” paper. We …

Read More »

STILL STUCK ON THE BACKWARD CLOCK: A REJOINDER TO CLARKE, ADAMS AND BARKER (pages 243-269)

John N. WILLIAMS ABSTRACT: Neil Sinhababu and I presented Backward Clock, an original counterexample to Robert Nozick’s truth-tracking analysis of propositional knowledge. In their latest defence of the truth-tracking theories, “Methods Matter: Beating the Backward Clock,” Murray Clarke, Fred Adams and John A. Barker try again to defend Nozick’s and Fred Dretske’s early analysis of propositional knowledge against Backward Clock. …

Read More »

METHODS MATTER: BEATING THE BACKWARD CLOCK (pages 99-112)

Murray Clarke, Fred Adams, and John A. Barker ABSTRACT: In “Beat the (Backward) Clock,” we argued that John Williams and Neil Sinhababu’s Backward Clock Case fails to be a counterexample to Robert Nozick’s or Fred Dretske’s Theories of Knowledge. Williams’ reply to our paper, “There’s Nothing to Beat a Backward Clock: A Rejoinder to Adams, Barker and Clarke,” is a further …

Read More »

BEAT THE (BACKWARD) CLOCK (pages 353-361)

Fred ADAMS, John A. BARKER, Murray CLARKE ABSTRACT: In a recent very interesting and important challenge to tracking theories of knowledge, Williams & Sinhababu claim to have devised a counter-example to tracking theories of knowledge of a sort that escapes the defense of those theories by Adams & Clarke.  In this paper we will explain why this is not true. Tracking theories are …

Read More »