Trouble for E=K?

Here’s a view that I think some people are attracted to, a tripartite view of how positive epistemic standing is attained: Tripartite View: For a belief to constitute knowledge, three elements
Philosophy News image
Here’s a view that I think some people are attracted to, a tripartite view of how positive epistemic standing is attained: Tripartite View: For a belief to constitute knowledge, three elements have to be in place: (a) There’s the belief about such and such; (b) Independent representational state of mind that represents some such and such; (c) The matter that the belief mentioned in (a) concerns that’s made rational by some state of mind mentioned in (b). When it comes to rationality or justification, only the first two terms are supposed to matter. This seems harmless enough, but it looks like this view might be in tension with a view I know you all love: E=K: Your evidence includes all and only what you know. 1. To know p, you have to have a reason to believe p where this reason is your reason for believing p, a reason that’s provided by a representational state of mind that’s independent from the belief that p. 2. This representational state either has p as its. . .

Continue reading . . .

News source: Certain Doubts »

blog comments powered by Disqus