Avoid common mistakes on your manuscript.
Correction to: Acta Analytica
The original version of this article unfortunately contained missing footnotes.
The missing footnotes are presented as.
-
1 Gettier 1963.
-
2 It is worth mentioning that Gettier’s case for the rejection of the JTB account only follows as a deductive consequence given the assumptions of epistemic closure and the idea that one can be justified in holding a false belief.
-
3 Gettier 1963, 122.
-
4 See Unger 1968, Pappas and Swain 1978, Shope, and Neta 2009 for a survey of the variety of post-Gettier accounts of knowledge.
-
5 Williamson 2011, 150. See also Williamson 2000, 184-208.
-
6 See Shaffer 2012, Shaffer 2013 and Shaffer 2015.
-
7 See Shaffer 2019.
-
8 See Shaffer 2019.
-
9 So, the argument also extends the result found in Shaffer 2019.
-
10 See Williamson 2000, Sosa 1999, Pritchard 2005, Pritchard 2007, Pritchard 2008, and Pritchard 2009.
-
11 See Nozick 1981.
-
12 See Engel 2011, Pritchard 2005 and Pritchard 2007. Williamson is keenly aware of the incompatibility of knowledge and epistemic luck, as his extensive discussion in his 2009 makes clear.
-
13 Williamson 2009, 10.
-
14 See Williamson 2009, 11 and 13.
-
15 This is the formalization of Willaimson’s “no close risk” conception of Safety. See Williamson 2009, 10-19. See also Rabinowitz 2019.
-
16 Nozick 1981.
-
17 Kripke 2011.
-
18 See Shaffer 2017 on this argument.
-
19 See Shaffer 2021 on the issue of the factivity of knowledge.
-
20 There will actually be many such worlds.
-
21 See Shaffer 2017.
-
22 Williamson 2009, 11.
-
23 T. Williamson 2011, 150. See also Williamson 2000, 184-208.
-
24 T. Williamson, 2009, 2
-
25 T. Williamson 2009, 6.
-
26 T. Willaimson 2009, 4-5.
-
27 T. Williamson 2009.
-
28 T. Williamson 2009, 19.
-
29 See Taylor 1997.
-
30 See Taylor 1997.
-
31 See Taylor 1997, chapter 4.
-
32 See Taylor 1997.
-
33 See Taylor 1997.
-
34 See Shaffer 2012, Shaffer 2013 and Shaffer 2015.
-
35 See Taylor 1997, chapter 4.
The original article has been corrected.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Additional information
Publisher’s Note
Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.
The original article can be found online at https://doi.org/10.1007/s12136-022-00510-7.
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Shaffer, M.J. Correction to: Epistemic Luck and Knowledge. Acta Anal 37, 7–8 (2022). https://doi.org/10.1007/s12136-022-00514-3
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s12136-022-00514-3