Moore's paradox and epistemic norms

Australasian Journal of Philosophy 88 (1):79 – 100 (2010)
Abstract
We shall evaluate two strategies for motivating the view that knowledge is the norm of belief. The first draws on observations concerning belief's aim and the parallels between belief and assertion. The second appeals to observations concerning Moore's Paradox. Neither of these strategies gives us good reason to accept the knowledge account. The considerations offered in support of this account motivate only the weaker account on which truth is the fundamental norm of belief
Keywords Epistemic Norms  Epistemic Justification  Moore's Paradox  Knowledge
Categories (categorize this paper)
Options
 Save to my reading list
Follow the author(s)
My bibliography
Export citation
Find it on Scholar
Edit this record
Mark as duplicate
Revision history Request removal from index
 
Download options
PhilPapers Archive
External links
  • Through your library Configure
    References found in this work BETA
    Alexander Bird (2007). Justified Judging. Philosophy and Phenomenological Research 74 (1):81–110.
    Alexander Bird (2007). Justified Judging. Philosophy and Phenomenological Research 74 (1):81-110.

    View all 25 references

    Citations of this work BETA
    Similar books and articles
    Analytics

    Monthly downloads

    Added to index

    2009-04-08

    Total downloads

    295 ( #781 of 1,089,047 )

    Recent downloads (6 months)

    24 ( #4,341 of 1,089,047 )

    How can I increase my downloads?

    My notes
    Sign in to use this feature


    Discussion
    Start a new thread
    Order:
    There  are no threads in this forum
    Nothing in this forum yet.