Skip to main content
Log in

In Defense of Sensitivity

  • Published:
Synthese Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

The sensitivity condition on knowledge says that one knows that P only if one would not believe that P if P were false. Difficulties for this condition are now well documented. Keith DeRose has recently suggested a revised sensitivity condition that is designed to avoid some of these difficulties. We argue, however, that there are decisive objections to DeRose’s revised condition. Yet rather than simply abandoning his proposed condition, we uncover a rationale for its adoption, a rationale which suggests a further revision that avoids our objections as well as others. The payoff is considerable: along the way to our revision, we learn lessons about the epistemic significance of certain explanatory relations, about how we ought to envisage epistemic closure principles, and about the epistemic significance of methods of belief formation.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • T. Black (2002) ArticleTitle‘A Moorean Response to Brain-in-a-Vat Scepticism’ Australasian Journal of Philosophy 80 148–163

    Google Scholar 

  • K. DeRose (1999) ‘Solving the Skeptical Problem’ K. DeRose T.A. Warfield (Eds) Reprinted in Skepticism A Contemporary Reader Oxford University Press New York

    Google Scholar 

  • E.L. Gettier (1963) ArticleTitle‘Is Justified True Belief Knowledge?’ Analysis 23 121–123 Occurrence Handle10.2307/3326922

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • A. Goldman (1976) ArticleTitle‘Discrimination and Perceptual Knowledge’ Journal of Philosophy 73 771–791 Occurrence Handle10.2307/2025679

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • R. Hale (2000) ArticleTitle‘Transmission and Closure’ Philosophical Issues 10 172–190 Occurrence Handle10.1111/j.1758-2237.2000.tb00020.x

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hendricks, V. F.: 2003, ‘Epistemology Aziomatized, UNESCO, Paris <http://www.ruc.dk/~vincent/epiaxiom.pdf> (4 Feb 2005).

  • J. Hintikka (1962) Knowledge and Belief An Introduction to the Logic of the Two Notions Cornell University Press Ithaca

    Google Scholar 

  • K. Kelly (1996) The Logic of Reliable Inquiry Oxford University Press New York

    Google Scholar 

  • Luper-Foy, S., (ed.): 1987, The Possibility of Knowledge: Nozick and His Critics, Rowman and Littlefield, Totowa, NJ.

  • R. Nozick (1981) Philosophical Explanations Harvard University Press Cambridge, MA

    Google Scholar 

  • Williamson, T.: 2000, Knowledge and its Limits, Oxford University Press.

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Tim Black.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Black, T., Murphy, P. In Defense of Sensitivity. Synthese 154, 53–71 (2007). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11229-005-8487-9

Download citation

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11229-005-8487-9

Keywords

Navigation