TRUE KNOWLEDGE (pages 455-461)

Peter BAUMANN

ABSTRACT: That knowledge is factive, that is, that knowledge that p requires that p, has for a long time typically been treated as a truism. Recently, however, some authors have raised doubts about and arguments against this claim. In a recent paper in this journal, Michael Shaffer presents new arguments against the denial of the factivity of knowledge. This article discusses one of Shaffer’s objections: the one from “inconsistency and explosion.” I discuss two potential replies to Shaffer’s problem: dialetheism plus paraconsistency and epistemic pluralism. This is not to be understood so much as a criticism of Shaffer’s view but rather as a request to develop his very promising objection from inconsistency and explosion further.

application-pdf Download PDF

Check Also

REDUCTION, INTUITION, AND COGNITIVE EFFORT IN SCIENTIFIC LANGUAGE (pages 389-401)

Miguel LÓPEZ-ASTORGA ABSTRACT: In his search for a better scientific language, Carnap offered a number …