Two conceptions of knowledge
Journal of Philosophy 67 (3):59-66 (1970)
| Abstract | Knowledge of the nature of knowledge is deplorably scarce. Fortunately, the reason is not lack of interest. On the contrary, the bewildering variety of competing theories is part of the problem. It is to, be hoped, however, that intensive discussion of such theories will help reduce the scarcity. In what follows I want to contribute to this end by briefly discussing two of the theories. | |||||||||
| Keywords | No keywords specified (fix it) | |||||||||
| Categories | ||||||||||
| Options |
|
|||||||||
Download options| PhilPapers Archive |
Upload a copy of this paper Check publisher's policy on self-archival Papers currently archived: 5,865 |
| External links |
 |
| Through your library | Configure |
Similar books and articlesBerit Brogaard (2003). Adhoccery in Epistemology. Philosophical Papers 32 (1):65-82.
Barry C. Smith (2006). What We Know When We Know a Language. In Ernest Lepore & Barry C. Smith (eds.), Oxford Handbook of Philosophy of Language.
Klemens Kappel (2010). Expressivism About Knowledge and the Value of Knowledge. Acta Analytica 25 (2):175-194.
Ram Neta (forthcoming). Reflections on Reflective Knowledge. Philosophical Studies.
Ernest Sosa (1991). Knowledge in Perspective: Selected Essays in Epistemology. Cambridge University Press.
Henry Jackman (2000). Deference and Self-Knowledge. Southwest Philosophy Review 16 (1):171-180.
R. Greene (2003). Constitutive Theories of Self-Knowledge and the Regress Problem. Philosophical Papers 32 (2):141-48.
Barry Barnes (1977). Interests and the Growth of Knowledge. Routledge and K. Paul.
Analytics
Monthly downloads |
Added to index2009-01-28Total downloads17 ( #72,058 of 556,774 )Recent downloads (6 months)2 ( #39,010 of 556,774 )How can I increase my downloads? |
My notes
Discussion
