Advertisement

Philosophical Studies

, Volume 132, Issue 3, pp 525–551 | Cite as

Anti-realism and Epistemic Accessibility

  • C. S. Jenkins
Article
  • 64 Downloads

Abstract

I argue that Fitch’s ‘paradox of knowability’ presents no special problem for the epistemic anti-realist who believes that reality is epistemically accessible to us. For the claim which is the target of the argument (If p then it is possible to know p) is not a commitment of anti-realism. The epistemic anti-realist’s commitment is (or should be) to the recognizability of the states of affairs which render true propositions true, not to the knowability of the propositions themselves. A formal apparatus for discussing the recognizability of states of affairs is offered, and other prima facie similar approaches to the paradox argument are reviewed.

Keywords

Actual World True Proposition Disjunctive Property Formal Apparatus Actual Thing 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Craig, E. (1998): ‘Realism and Antirealism’, in E. Craig (ed.), Routledge Encyclopedia of Philosophy, London: Routledge. Retrieved January 06, 2005, from http://www.rep.routledge.com/article/N049SECT3.
  2. Dummett M. (2001). Victor’s Error. Analysis 61: 1–2.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Edgington D. (1985). The Paradox of Knowability. Mind 94: 557–568 .CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Fitch F. (1963). A Logical Analysis of Some Value Concepts. Journal of Symbolic Logic 28: 113–118 .CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Kvanvig J. (1995). The Knowability Paradox and the Prospects for Anti-Realism. Nous 29: 481–500 .Google Scholar
  6. Rückert, H. (2004): A Solution to Fitch’s Paradox of Knowability, in S. Rahman and J. Simons (eds.), Logic, Epistemology and the Unity of Science, Kluwer Academic Publishers, pp. 351–380.Google Scholar
  7. Tennant N. (2002). Victor Vanquished. Analysis 62: 135–142 .CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Williamson, T. (2000): Knowledge and its Limits, Oxford University Press.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer 2006

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Arché AHRB Research Centre, School of Philosophical and Anthropological StudiesUniversity of St AndrewsSt Andrews, FifeUK

Personalised recommendations