Switch to: Citations

Add references

You must login to add references.
  1. Restricting factiveness.Fredrik Stjernberg - 2009 - Philosophical Studies 146 (1):29 - 48.
    In discussions of Fitch’s paradox, it is usually assumed without further argument that knowledge is factive, that if a subject knows that p, then p is true. It is argued that this common assumption is not as well-founded as it should be, and that there in fact are certain reasons to be suspicious of the unrestricted version of the factiveness claim. There are two kinds of reason for this suspicion. One is that unrestricted factiveness leads to paradoxes and unexpected results, (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   10 citations  
  • The surprise examination paradox.James McLelland & Charles Chihara - 1975 - Journal of Philosophical Logic 4 (1):71 - 89.
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   9 citations  
  • The Morning Star Paradox.Stig Kanger - 1957 - Theoria 23 (1):1-11.
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   35 citations  
  • A paradox regained.D. Kaplan & R. Montague - 1960 - Notre Dame Journal of Formal Logic 1 (3):79-90.
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   102 citations  
  • Epistemic closure principles.John M. Collins - 2006 - Internet Encyclopedia of Philosophy.
    This is an encyclopedia article about epistemic closure principles. The article explains what they are, their various philosophical uses, how they are argued for or against, and provides an overview of the related literature.
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   5 citations  
  • The Surprise Examination Paradox and the Second Incompleteness Theorem.Shira Kritchman & Ran Raz - unknown
    We give a new proof for Godel's second incompleteness theorem, based on Kolmogorov complexity, Chaitin's incompleteness theorem, and an argument that resembles the surprise examination paradox. We then go the other way around and suggest that the second incompleteness theorem gives a possible resolution of the surprise examination paradox. Roughly speaking, we argue that the flaw in the derivation of the paradox is that it contains a hidden assumption that one can prove the consistency of the mathematical theory in which (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   14 citations