Lexicon of Arguments

Philosophical and Scientific Issues in Dispute
 
[german]


Complaints - Corrections

Table
Concepts
Versus
Sc. Camps
Theses I
Theses II

Concept/Author*  

What is wrong?
Page
Other metadata
Translation
Excerpt or content
Other

Correction: Year / Place / Page
/ /

Correction:
(max 500 charact.)

Your username*
or User-ID

Email address*

The complaint
will not be published.

 
Frank I 698
Knowledge/Thought/Enabling Conditions/Burge: We do not ask anyone to assure themselves that the light is not being deflected by a mirror or that he is not facing a dummy when he takes a piece of bread.
In fact, it is part of our common understanding of the objectivity of perception that there is no general guarantee for distinguishing something from an imitation. The possibility of deception (error) is part of the essence of the objectivity of perception. >Objectivity, >Perception, >Forgeries, >Barn facades.
This is true in every-day life, but even in philosophy it is true that perception knowledge does not require knowledge about the enabling conditions.
Frank I 704
Knowledge/Self-Knowledge/Content/Perception Knowledge/Burge: if the background conditions are so different that there is a different reference object in their own self-referential thinking, then they are so different that there is another thought. >Self-knowledge.
But the person remains in the same reflexive position, in turn, to authoritatively know what she thinks.
E.g. in a slow transition from the earth to twin earth, the epistemic claims are justified if the person thinks "I'm thinking that water/twin-earth water is a liquid." They are right in both cases.
Burge: the fact that the person knows nothing about the changeover is irrelevant to the truth and justification of the judgments! >Twin earth, >Justification.
The answer to the question of a person who has noticed the conversion "Do I now think of water or twin-water?" is obvious: both! Because both terms are needed!



Tyler Burge (1988a): Individualism and Self-Knowledge, in: The Journal of
Philosophy 85 (1988), 649-663

Found an error? Use our Complaint Form. Perhaps someone forgot to close a bracket? A page number is wrong?
Help us to improve our lexicon.
However, if you are of a different opinion, as regards the validity of the argument, post your own argument beside the contested one.
The correction will be sent to the contributor of the original entry to get his opinion about.