Switch to: References

Add citations

You must login to add citations.
  1. Forms of Luminosity: Epistemic Modality and Hyperintensionality in Mathematics.David Elohim - 2017 - Dissertation, Arché, University of St Andrews
    This book concerns the foundations of epistemic modality and hyperintensionality and their applications to the philosophy of mathematics. I examine the nature of epistemic modality, when the modal operator is interpreted as concerning both apriority and conceivability, as well as states of knowledge and belief. The book demonstrates how epistemic modality and hyperintensionality relate to the computational theory of mind; metaphysical modality and hyperintensionality; the types of mathematical modality and hyperintensionality; to the epistemic status of large cardinal axioms, undecidable propositions, (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   5 citations  
  • Forms of Luminosity: Epistemic Modality and Hyperintensionality in Mathematics.David Elohim - 2017
    This book concerns the foundations of epistemic modality and hyperintensionality and their applications to the philosophy of mathematics. I examine the nature of epistemic modality, when the modal operator is interpreted as concerning both apriority and conceivability, as well as states of knowledge and belief. The book demonstrates how epistemic modality and hyperintensionality relate to the computational theory of mind; metaphysical modality and hyperintensionality; the types of mathematical modality and hyperintensionality; to the epistemic status of large cardinal axioms, undecidable propositions, (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  • Fixed Points in the Hyperintensional Epistemic $\mu$-Calculus and the KK Principle.David Elohim - manuscript
    This essay provides a novel account of iterated epistemic states. The essay argues that states of epistemic determinacy might be secured by countenancing iterated epistemic states on the model of fixed points in the modal $\mu$-calculus. Despite the epistemic indeterminacy witnessed by the invalidation of modal axiom 4 in the sorites paradox -- i.e. the KK principle: $\square$$\phi$ $\rightarrow$ $\square$$\square$$\phi$ -- a hyperintensional epistemic $\mu$-automaton permits fixed points to entrain a principled means by which to iterate epistemic states and account (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  • Epistemicist Models: Comments on Gómez‐Torrente and Graff.Timothy Williamson - 2002 - Philosophy and Phenomenological Research 64 (1):143-150.
    Every philosopher should wish for commentators as thoughtful and rigorous as Mario Gómez-Torrente and Delia Graff. Their papers contribute significantly to our understanding of the fine structure of vagueness, but not by undermining its epistemicist interpretation.
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   4 citations  
  • Higher-Order Sorites Paradox.Elia Zardini - 2013 - Journal of Philosophical Logic 42 (1):25-48.
    The naive theory of vagueness holds that the vagueness of an expression consists in its failure to draw a sharp boundary between positive and negative cases. The naive theory is contrasted with the nowadays dominant approach to vagueness, holding that the vagueness of an expression consists in its presenting borderline cases of application. The two approaches are briefly compared in their respective explanations of a paramount phenomenon of vagueness: our ignorance of any sharp boundary between positive and negative cases. These (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   14 citations  
  • Reply to Machina and Deutsch on vagueness, ignorance, and margins for error.Timothy Williamson - 2002 - Acta Analytica 17 (1):47-61.
    In their paper “Vagueness, Ignorance, and Margins for Error” Kenton Machina and Harry Deutsch criticize the epistemic theory of vagueness. This paper answers their objections. The main issues discussed are: the relation between meaning and use; the principle of bivalence; the ontology of vaguely specified classes; the proper form of margin for error principles; iterations of epistemic operators and semantic compositionality; the relation or lack of it between quantum mechanics and theories of vagueness.
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   1 citation  
  • Epistemicist models: Comments on gómez-torrente and Graff.Timothy Williamson - 2002 - Philosophy and Phenomenological Research 64 (1):143-150.
    Every philosopher should wish for commentators as thoughtful and rigorous as Mario Gómez-Torrente and Delia Graff. Their papers contribute significantly to our understanding of the fine structure of vagueness, but not by undermining its epistemicist interpretation.
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   5 citations  
  • Epistemic Approaches to Vagueness.Zoltán Vecsey - 2010 - Dialogue 49 (2):295-307.
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  • Williamson’s Epistemicism and Properties Accounts of Predicates.Paul Teller - 2024 - Philosophia 52 (1):161-186.
    If the semantic values of predicates are, as Williamson assumes (_Philsophical Perspectives,_ _13_, 505–517, 1999, 509) properties in the intensional sense, then epistemicism is immediate. Epistemicism fails, so also this properties account of predicates. I deploy examination of Williamson’s account as a foil against properties as semantic values, showing that his two positive arguments for bivalence fail, as do his efforts to rescue epistemicism from obvious problems. In Part II I argue that, despite the properties account’s problems, it has an (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  • God and the possibility of random creation.Jesse Ramon Steinberg - 2008 - Sophia 47 (2):193-199.
    In this paper I discuss a number of problems associated with the suggestion that it is possible for God to randomly select a possible world for actualization.
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   1 citation  
  • Instrumentos, Artefactos y Contexto.Ricardo Mena - 2018 - Análisis Filosófico 38 (1):83-102.
    It is notoriously difficult to model the range of application of vague predicates relative to a suitable sorites series. In this paper I offer some critical remarks against an interesting view that has received little attention in the literature. According to it, the sharp cut-offs we find in our semantic models are just artifacts of the theory, and, as such, they are harmless. At the end I discuss a contextualist view that, at a cost, may be able to get around (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  • The instability of vague terms.Anna Mahtani - 2004 - Philosophical Quarterly 54 (217):570–576.
    Timothy Williamson's response to the question why we cannot know where the sharp boundaries marked by vague terms lie involves the claim that vague terms are unstable. Several theorists would not accept this claim, and it is tempting to think that this gives them a good objection to Williamson. By clarifying the structure of Williamson's response to the title question, I show that this objection is wrong-headed, and reveal a new line of attack.
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   2 citations  
  • Epistemicism about vagueness and meta-linguistic safety.Stephen Kearns & Ofra Magidor - 2008 - Philosophical Perspectives 22 (1):277-304.
    The paper challenges Williamson’s safety based explanation for why we cannot know the cut-off point of vague expressions. We assume throughout (most of) the paper that Williamson is correct in saying that vague expressions have sharp cut-off points, but we argue that Williamson’s explanation for why we do not and cannot know these cut-off points is unsatisfactory. -/- In sect 2 we present Williamson's position in some detail. In particular, we note that Williamson's explanation relies on taking a particular safety (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   17 citations  
  • Temporal externalism and epistemic theories of vagueness.Henry Jackman - 2004 - Philosophical Studies 117 (1-2):79-94.
    'Epistemic' theories of vagueness notoriously claim that (despite the appearances to the contrary) all of our vague terms have sharp boundaries, it's just that we can't know what they are. Epistemic theories are typically criticized for failing to explain (1) the source of the ignorance postulated, and (2) how our terms could come to have such precise boundaries. Both of these objections will, however, be shown to rest on certain 'presentist' assumptions about the relation between use and meaning, and if (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   8 citations  
  • An anti-epistemicist consequence of Margin for error semantics for knowledge.Delia Graff Fara - 2002 - Philosophy and Phenomenological Research 64 (1):127-142.
    Let us say that the proposition that p is transparent just in case it is known that p, and it is known that it is known that p, and it is known that it is known that it is known that p, and so on, for any number of iterations of the knowledge operator ‘it is known that’. If there are transparent propositions at all, then the claim that any man with zero hairs is bald seems like a good candidate. (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   13 citations  
  • The impossibility of vagueness.Kit Fine - 2008 - Philosophical Perspectives 22 (1):111-136.
    I wish to present a proof that vagueness is impossible. Of course, vagueness is possible; and so there must be something wrong with the proof. But it is far from clear where the error lies and, indeed, all of the assumptions upon which the proof depends are ones that have commonly been accepted. This suggests that we may have to radically alter our current conception of vagueness if we are to make proper sense of what it is.
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   14 citations  
  • Vagueza.Ricardo Santos - 2015 - Compêndio Em Linha de Problemas de Filosofia Analítica.
    Most words in natural language are vague, that is to say, they lack sharp boundaries and, hence, they have (actual or potential) borderline cases, where the word in question neither definitely applies nor definitely fails to apply. Vagueness gives rise to paradoxes, the best known of which is the sorites (concerned with how many grains of sand are needed to make a heap). Besides offering a solution to such paradoxes, a theory of vagueness should systematically describe how the truth conditions (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   1 citation