Knowability as potential knowledge
نویسنده
چکیده
The thesis that every truth is knowable is usually glossed by decomposing knowability into possibility and knowledge. Under elementary assumptions about possibility and knowledge, considered as modal operators, the thesis collapses the distinction between truth and knowledge (as shown by the so-called Fitch-argument). We show that there is a more plausible interpretation of knowability—one that does not decompose the notion in the usual way—to which the Fitch-argument does not apply. We call this the potential knowledge-interpretation of knowability. We compare our interpretation with the rephrasal of knowability proposed by Edgington and Rabinowicz and Segerberg, inserting an actuality-operator. This proposal shares some key features with ours but suffers from requiring specific transworld-knowledge. We observe that potential knowledge involves no transworld-knowledge. We describe the logic of potential knowledge by providing models for interpreting the new operator. Finally we show that the knowability thesis can be added to elementary conditions on potential knowledge without collapsing modal distinctions.
منابع مشابه
The Knowability Argument and the Syntactic Type-Theoretic Approach
Recently, there have been some attempts to block the Knowability Paradox and other modal paradoxes by adopting a type-theoretic framework in which knowledge and necessity are regarded as typed predicates. The main problem with this approach is that when these notions are simultaneously treated as predicates, a new kind of paradox appears. I claim that avoiding this paradox either by weakening t...
متن کاملThe Determinants of Knowability
Many propositions are not known to be true or false, and many phenomena are not understood. What determines what propositions and phenomena are perceived as knowable or unknowable? We tested whether factors related to scientific methodology (a proposition’s reducibility and falsifiability), its intrinsic metaphysics (the materiality of the phenomena and its scope of applicability), and its rela...
متن کاملWhy Knowledge Should Not Be Typed: An Argument against the Type Solution to the Knowability Paradox
The Knowability Paradox is a logical argument to the effect that, if there are truths not actually known, then there are unknowable truths. Recently, Alexander Paseau and Bernard Linsky have independently suggested a possible way to counter this argument by typing knowledge. In this article, we argue against their proposal that if one abstracts from other possible independent considerations sup...
متن کاملLogic and Topology for Knowledge, Knowability, and Belief - Extended Abstract
In recent work, Stalnaker proposes a logical framework in which belief is realized as a weakened form of knowledge [33]. Building on Stalnaker’s core insights, and using frameworks developed in [12] and [4], we employ topological tools to refine and, we argue, improve on this analysis. The structure of topological subset spaces allows for a natural distinction between what is known and (roughly...
متن کاملTR-2010008: Knowability from a Logical Point of View
The well-known Church-Fitch paradox shows that the verificationist knowability principle all truths are knowable, yields an unacceptable omniscience property. Our semantic analysis establishes that the knowability principle fails because it misses the stability assumption ‘the proposition in question does not change from true to false in the process of discovery,’ hidden in the verificationist ...
متن کاملذخیره در منابع من
با ذخیره ی این منبع در منابع من، دسترسی به آن را برای استفاده های بعدی آسان تر کنید
عنوان ژورنال:
- Synthese
دوره 191 شماره
صفحات -
تاریخ انتشار 2014