Analysis 69 (3):452-458 (2009)

Authors
Ghislain Guigon
University of Geneva (PhD)
Abstract
Church and Fitch have argued that from the verificationationist thesis “for every proposition, if this proposition is true, then it is possible to know it” we can derive that for every truth there is someone who knows that truth. Moreover, Humberstone has shown that from the latter proposition we can derive that someone knows every truth, hence that there is an omniscient being. In his article “Omnificence”, John Bigelow adapted these arguments in order to argue that from the assumption "every contingent proposition is such that if it is true something brought it about that it is true" we can derive that there is an omnificent being: a being that brings it about that every true contingent proposition is true. In my reply to his article, I show that Bigelow’s argument is flawed because there is some formal property that the knowledge operator has but that the bringing about operator lacks. This is the property of distributing over conjunctions. I explain why what brings it about that some conjunctive proposition is true need not bring it about that its conjuncts are true.
Keywords omnificence  causal explanation  cosmological argument  grounding
Categories (categorize this paper)
DOI 10.1093/analys/anp070
Options
Edit this record
Mark as duplicate
Export citation
Find it on Scholar
Request removal from index
Revision history

Download options

References found in this work BETA

Four Dimensionalism.Theodore Sider - 1997 - Philosophical Review 106 (2):197-231.
Theories of Location.Josh Parsons - 2007 - Oxford Studies in Metaphysics 3:201.

View all 9 references / Add more references

Citations of this work BETA

A Universe of Explanations.Ghislain Guigon - 2015 - In Karen Bennett & Dean W. Zimmerman (eds.), Oxford Studies in Metaphysics. Oxford University Press. pp. 345-375.
Collecting Truths: A Paradox in Two Guises.Eric Updike - forthcoming - Analytic Philosophy.

Add more citations

Similar books and articles

Theory-Conjunction and Mercenary Reliance.J. D. Trout - 1992 - Philosophy of Science 59 (2):231-245.
No Logic of Cogency: Reply to Oakley.John Bigelow & Robert Pargetter - 1998 - Australasian Journal of Philosophy 76 (3):464 – 472.
The Invalidation of Induction: A Reply to Pargetter and Bigelow.I. T. Oakley - 1998 - Australasian Journal of Philosophy 76 (3):452 – 463.
Generalized Conjunction and Temporal Modification.Peter Lasersohn - 1992 - Linguistics and Philosophy 15 (4):381 - 410.
Omnificence.John Bigelow - 2005 - Analysis 65 (3):187–196.

Analytics

Added to PP index
2009-07-01

Total views
428 ( #18,908 of 2,445,952 )

Recent downloads (6 months)
9 ( #75,837 of 2,445,952 )

How can I increase my downloads?

Downloads

My notes