Necessary truths, evidence, and knowledge.

Filosofia Unisinos 17 (3):302-307 (2016)
  Copy   BIBTEX

Abstract

According to the knowledge view of evidence notoriously defended by Timothy Williamson (2000), for any subject, her evidence consists of all and only her propositional knowledge (E=K). Many have found (E=K) implausible. However, few have offered arguments against Williamson’s positive case for (E=K). In this paper, I propose an argument against Williamson’s positive case in favour of (E=K). Central to my argument is the possibility of the knowledge of necessary truths. I also draw some more general conclusions concerning theorizing about evidence.

Author's Profile

Artūrs Logins
Université Laval

Analytics

Added to PP
2017-11-04

Downloads
411 (#38,900)

6 months
59 (#66,708)

Historical graph of downloads since first upload
This graph includes both downloads from PhilArchive and clicks on external links on PhilPapers.
How can I increase my downloads?