|
Craig, Edward
University Lecturer in Philosophy and Fellow of Churchill College, Cambridge
Print publication date: 1999 (this edition)
Published to Oxford Scholarship Online: November 2003 Print ISBN-13: 978-0-19-823879-9 |
|
|
doi:10.1093/0198238797.003.0006
Abstract: The practical explication is employed to explain why accidental fulfilment of the conditions for knowledge leads us to withhold the ascription of it, and what is meant by accidental in this context. The inquirer wants her informant to have some detectable property, X, possession of which correlates well with being right about p, and for this correlation to be law-like, and for the continuation of the correlation in any given instance to be non-accidental. At this point, a dilemma arises: either X must entail that S is right about p (too strong), or X must give a high probability of being right as to p (but then it is possible for X to be present but for S to be wrong on p). This property of p, inherent in the explicated concept of knowledge, thus mirrors a feature which, to judge by the discussion of the Gettier problem, the analysed concept has too.
Keywords: accident, defeasibility, explication, Gettier, knowledge, probability,
|
|
|
|
|