Knowledge-to-fact arguments (bootstrapping, closure, paradox and KK)

DOI10.1093/ANALYS/ANW018zbMATH Open1369.03071OpenAlexW2955868720MaRDI QIDQ5269664FDOQ5269664

Authors: Murali Ramachandran 

Publication date: 27 June 2017

Published in: Analysis (Search for Journal in Brave)

Full work available at URL: https://doi.org/10.1093/analys/anw018

Recommendations

• Williamson, closure, and KK
• The knower paradox and epistemic closure
• Publication:4508321
• Margin for error and the transparency of knowledge
• Why safety doesn't save closure

zbMATH Keywords

bootstrappingclosureWilliamsonKK-principlesurprise exam

Mathematics Subject Classification ID

Philosophical and critical aspects of logic and foundations (03A05) Logics of knowledge and belief (including belief change) (03B42)

Cited In (19)

• The paradox of the knower revisited
• The Evil Demon argument as based on closure plus meta-coherence
• Knowledge is closed under analytic content
• Two claims about epistemic propriety
• McKinsey paradoxes, radical scepticism, and the transmission of knowledge across known entailments
• Margin for error and the transparency of knowledge
• A new argument for distinguishing rejection and denial
• The KK-principle, margins for error, and safety
• Knowing by way of tracking and epistemic closure
• Dilemmic epistemology
• Transparency and the KK principle
• Title not available (Why is that?)
• The pragmatic encroachment debate
• Inductive knowledge
• If you don't know that you know, you could be surprised
• Williamson, closure, and KK
• On synchronic dogmatism
• Elusive knowledge
• Epistemic closure under deductive inference: what is it and can we afford it?

This page was built for publication: Knowledge-to-fact arguments (bootstrapping, closure, paradox and KK)

Report a bug (only for logged in users!)Click here to report a bug for this page (MaRDI item Q5269664)