On Edgington’s Formalization of the Principle of Knowability

Cover Page

Cite item

Full Text

Abstract

The formalization of the principle of knowability suggested by Dorothy Edgington is examined. This formalization has been suggested as a solution to the Fitch problem. It is interesting in that it blocks the Fitch argument and, in informal reading, makes a clear and intuitively appealing sense. On the other hand, as is shown in the paper, the semantic theory behind this formalization has two significant gaps: 1) it does not define the interpretation of actuality operator, and 2) it does not define the semantic way of representing the agent’sknowledge. The main outcome of the papers is critical. It is to the effect that unless those gaps are filled, Edgington’stheory cannot count as a solution to the Fitch problem.

About the authors

E. V. Borisov

Institute of Philosophy and Law SB RAS

Email: borisov.evgeny@gmail.com
ORCID iD: 0000-0001-6587-9616
Doctor of Philosophy, Chief Researcher Novosibirsk

References

  1. Borisov, E. (2021). Knowability without rigidity. Filosofija. Sociologija. Vol. 32. no. 3. pp. 194-202. doi: 10.6001/fil-soc.v32i3.4491.
  2. Brogaard, B., Salerno, J. (2019). Fitch’s Paradox of Knowability [Online]. Available at: https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/fitch-paradox/ (Accessed: 1 November 2019).
  3. Edgington, D. (1985). The Paradox of Knowability. Mind. Vol. 94. pp. 557-568.
  4. Edgington, D. (2010). Possible Knowledge of Unknown Truth. Synthese. Vol. 173. pp. 41-52. DOI: s11229-009-9675-9.
  5. Fara, M. (2010). Knowability and Capacity to Know. Synthese. Vol. 173. pp. 53-73. DOI: s11229-009-9676-8.
  6. Fitch, F. (1963). A Logical Analysis of Some Value Concepts. Journal of Symbolic Logic. Vol. 28. pp. 113-118.
  7. Humberstone, L. (1981). From Worlds to Possibilities. Journal of Philosophical Logic. Vol. 10. pp. 313-339.
  8. Jenkins, C. S. (2007). Anti-realism and Epistemic Accessibility. Philosophical Studies: An International Journal for Philosophy in the Analytic Tradition. Vol. 132. pp. 525-551. doi: 10.1007/s11098-005-2533-9.
  9. Kvanvig, J. (2006). The Knowability Paradox. Oxford: Clarendon Press.
  10. Rabinowicz, W, Segerberg, K. (1994). Actual Truth, Possible Knowledge. Topoi. Vol. 13. pp. 101-115.
  11. Rückert, H. (2004). A Solution to Fitch's Paradox of Knowability. In Rahman, S., Symons, S., Gabbay, D. M., Bendegem, J. P. van (eds.) Logic, Epistemology and the Unity of Science. Dordrecht: Springer Science+Business Media B.V. pp. 351-380.
  12. Salerno, J. (ed.) (2009). New Essays on the Knowability Paradox. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
  13. Williamson, T. (1987). On the Paradox of Knowability. Mind. Vol. 95. pp. 256-261.
  14. Williamson, T. (2000). Knowledge and its Limits. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Supplementary files

Supplementary Files
Action
1. JATS XML

Согласие на обработку персональных данных

 

Используя сайт https://journals.rcsi.science, я (далее – «Пользователь» или «Субъект персональных данных») даю согласие на обработку персональных данных на этом сайте (текст Согласия) и на обработку персональных данных с помощью сервиса «Яндекс.Метрика» (текст Согласия).