Sensitivity has Multiple Heterogeneity Problems: a Reply to Wallbridge

Philosophia 45 (4):1741-1747 (2017)

Guido Melchior
University of Graz
In this paper, I defend the heterogeneity problem for sensitivity accounts of knowledge against an objection that has been recently proposed by Wallbridge in Philosophia. I argue in, 479–496, 2015) that sensitivity accounts of knowledge face a heterogeneity problem when it comes to higher-level knowledge about the truth of one’s own beliefs. Beliefs in weaker higher-level propositions are insensitive, but beliefs in stronger higher-level propositions are sensitive. The resulting picture that we can know the stronger propositions without being in a position to know the weaker propositions is too heterogeneous to be plausible. Wallbridge objects that there is no heterogeneity problem because beliefs in the weaker higher-level propositions are also sensitive. I argue against Wallbridge that the heterogeneity problem is not solved but only displaced. Only some beliefs in the weaker higher-level propositions are sensitive. I conclude that the heterogeneity problem is one of a family of instability problems that sensitivity accounts of knowledge face and that Wallbridge’s account raises a further problem of this kind.
Keywords sensitivity  bootstrapping  higher-order knowledge
Categories (categorize this paper)
DOI 10.1007/s11406-017-9873-5
Edit this record
Mark as duplicate
Export citation
Find it on Scholar
Request removal from index
Revision history

Download options

Our Archive
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

Solving the Skeptical Problem.Keith DeRose - 1995 - Philosophical Review 104 (1):1-52.
How to Defeat Opposition to Moore.Ernest Sosa - 1999 - Philosophical Perspectives 13:137-49.
Solving the Skeptical Problem.Keith DeRose - 1999 - In Keith DeRose & Ted A. Warfield (eds.), Skepticism: A Contemporary Reader. Oup Usa.
How to Defeat Opposition to Moore.Ernest Sosa - 1999 - Noûs 33 (s13):141-153.
Philosophical Explanations.Robert Nozick - 1982 - Critica 14 (41):87-93.

View all 18 references / Add more references

Citations of this work BETA

Higher-Order Knowledge and Sensitivity.Jens Christian Bjerring & Lars Bo Gundersen - 2020 - Canadian Journal of Philosophy 50 (3):339-349.

Add more citations

Similar books and articles

Sensitivity, Induction, and Miracles.Kevin Wallbridge - 2018 - Australasian Journal of Philosophy 96 (1):118-126.
Sensitivity and Higher-Order Knowledge.Kevin Wallbridge - forthcoming - Pacific Philosophical Quarterly.
Underdetermination and Provability: A Reply to Olaf Müller.Timm Lampert - 2017 - British Journal for the History of Philosophy 25 (2):389-400.
Strategies in Temporal Reasoning.Walter Schaeken & Philip N. Johnson-Laird - 2000 - Thinking and Reasoning 6 (3):193 – 219.
An Additional Heterogeneity Hypothesis.Guy Dove - 2010 - Behavioral and Brain Sciences 33 (2-3):209 - 210.
The Sensitivity Principle in Epistemology.Kelly Becker & Tim Black (eds.) - 2012 - Cambridge University Press.
The Applicabilities of Mathematics.Mark Steiner - 1995 - Philosophia Mathematica 3 (2):129-156.
The Semantics of Knowledge Attributions.Nikola Kompa - 2005 - Acta Analytica 20 (1):16-28.
Sensitivity Actually.Michael Blome-Tillmann - 2017 - Philosophy and Phenomenological Research 94 (3):606-625.


Added to PP index

Total views
68 ( #132,933 of 2,310,062 )

Recent downloads (6 months)
16 ( #44,661 of 2,310,062 )

How can I increase my downloads?


My notes

Sign in to use this feature