Evidence and Knowledge

Erkenntnis 74 (2):241-262 (2011)
Authors
Clayton Littlejohn
King's College London
Abstract
According to Williamson, your evidence consists of all and only what you know (E = K). According to his critics, it doesn’t. While E = K calls for revision, the revisions it calls for are minor. E = K gets this much right. Only true propositions can constitute evidence and anything you know non-inferentially is part of your evidence. In this paper, I defend these two theses about evidence and its possession from Williamson’s critics who think we should break more radically from E = K
Keywords Philosophy   Logic   Ethics   Ontology   Epistemology   Philosophy
Categories (categorize this paper)
DOI 10.1007/s10670-010-9247-x
Options
Edit this record
Mark as duplicate
Export citation
Find it on Scholar
Request removal from index
Revision history

Download options

Our Archive


Upload a copy of this paper     Check publisher's policy     Papers currently archived: 38,113
Through your library

References found in this work BETA

Knowledge and its Limits.Timothy Williamson - 2000 - Oxford University Press.
Is Justified True Belief Knowledge?Edmund Gettier - 1963 - Analysis 23 (6):121-123.

View all 28 references / Add more references

Citations of this work BETA

Fake Barns and False Dilemmas.Clayton Littlejohn - 2014 - Episteme 11 (4):369-389.
Evidentialism, Circularity, and Grounding.Bob Beddor - 2015 - Philosophical Studies 172 (7):1847-1868.
Some Evidence is False.Alexander Arnold - 2013 - Australasian Journal of Philosophy 91 (1):165 - 172.
A Plea for Falsehoods.Juan Comesaña - forthcoming - Philosophy and Phenomenological Research.

View all 10 citations / Add more citations

Similar books and articles

Analytics

Added to PP index
2010-10-17

Total views
286 ( #16,895 of 2,313,478 )

Recent downloads (6 months)
11 ( #59,659 of 2,313,478 )

How can I increase my downloads?

Monthly downloads

My notes

Sign in to use this feature