Evidence and Knowledge
- First Online:
- Cite this article as:
- Littlejohn, C. Erkenn (2011) 74: 241. doi:10.1007/s10670-010-9247-x
- 240 Downloads
According to Williamson, your evidence consists of all and only what you know (E = K). According to his critics, it doesn’t. While E = K calls for revision, the revisions it calls for are minor. E = K gets this much right. Only true propositions can constitute evidence and anything you know non-inferentially is part of your evidence. In this paper, I defend these two theses about evidence and its possession from Williamson’s critics who think we should break more radically from E = K.