Abstract
In this paper, we argue that Williamson’s arguments against luminosity and the KK principle do not work, at least in a scientific context. Both of these arguments are based on the presence of a so-called “buffer zone” between situations in which one is in a position to know p and situations in which one is in a position to know ¬p. In those positions belonging to the buffer zone ¬p holds, but one is not in a position to know ¬p. The presence of this buffer zone triggers two types of sorites arguments. We show that this kind of argument does not hold in a scientific context, where the buffer zone is controlled by a quantitative measurement of the experimental error.
| Lingua originale | Inglese |
|---|---|
| pagine (da-a) | N/A-N/A |
| Rivista | Foundations of Science |
| Numero di pubblicazione | N/A |
| DOI | |
| Stato di pubblicazione | Pubblicato - 2020 |
All Science Journal Classification (ASJC) codes
- Multidisciplinare
- Storia e Filosofia della Scienza
Keywords
- Epistemology
Fingerprint
Entra nei temi di ricerca di 'Williamson On the Margins of Knowledge: A Criticism'. Insieme formano una fingerprint unica.Cita questo
- APA
- Author
- BIBTEX
- Harvard
- Standard
- RIS
- Vancouver