Safety, The Lottery Puzzle, and Misprinted Lottery Results

Journal of Philosophical Research 34:47-49 (2009)
  Copy   BIBTEX

Abstract

The safety analysis of knowledge, due to Duncan Pritchard, has it that for all contingent propositions, p, S knows that p iff S believes that p, p is true, and (the “safety principle”) in most nearby worlds in which S forms his belief in the same way as in the actual world, S believes that p only if p is true. Among the other virtues claimed by Pritchard for this view is its supposed ability to solve a version of the lottery puzzle. In this paper, I argue that the safety analysis of knowledge in fact fails to solve the lottery puzzle. I also argue that a revised version of the safety principle recently put forward by Pritchard fares no better.

Other Versions

No versions found

Links

PhilArchive



    Upload a copy of this work     Papers currently archived: 100,830

External links

Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server

Through your library

Analytics

Added to PP
2011-01-22

Downloads
270 (#98,947)

6 months
28 (#119,353)

Historical graph of downloads
How can I increase my downloads?

Author's Profile

Mark McEvoy
Hofstra University

Citations of this work

How to Play the Lottery Safely?Haicheng Zhao - 2023 - Episteme 20 (1):23-38.
Beware of Safety.Christian Piller - 2019 - Analytic Philosophy 60 (4):01-29.
Lotteries, Quasi-Lotteries, and Scepticism.Eugene Mills - 2012 - Australasian Journal of Philosophy 90 (2):335-352.
Um problema para a epistemologia anti-sorte de Pritchard.Lucas Roisenberg Rodrigues - 2017 - Veritas – Revista de Filosofia da Pucrs 62 (3):683-704.

View all 7 citations / Add more citations

References found in this work

No references found.

Add more references