The KK-Principle, Margins for Error, and Safety

Erkenntnis 76 (1):121-136 (2012)
Abstract
This paper considers, and rejects, three strategies aimed at showing that the KK-principle fails even in most favourable circumstances (all emerging from Williamson’s Knowledge and its Limits ). The case against the final strategy provides positive grounds for thinking that the principle should hold good in such situations
Keywords No keywords specified (fix it)
Categories No categories specified
(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


Upload a copy of this paper     Check publisher's policy on self-archival     Papers currently archived: 10,273
External links
Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server
Configure custom proxy (use this if your affiliation does not provide a proxy)
Through your library
References found in this work BETA
Murali Ramachandran (2009). Anti-Luminosity: Four Unsuccessful Strategies. Australasian Journal of Philosophy 87 (4):659-673.
Citations of this work BETA

No citations found.

Similar books and articles
Brian Weatherson (2004). Luminous Margins. Australasian Journal of Philosophy 82 (3):373 – 383.
Timothy Williamson (2000). Margins for Error: A Reply. Philosophical Quarterly 50 (198):76-81.
Danilo Marcondes de Souza Filho (2002). The Maker's Knowledge Principle and the Limits of Science. Proceedings of the American Catholic Philosophical Association 76:229-237.
Analytics

Monthly downloads

Added to index

2011-08-13

Total downloads

19 ( #83,525 of 1,096,270 )

Recent downloads (6 months)

2 ( #130,630 of 1,096,270 )

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.