Books on Amazon
Definition knowledge/Hintikka: is that what enables the knowing person to concentrate on the subset W1 of the set of all worlds W.
W1: W1 is then relative not only to the knowing person b, but also relative to the scenario w0 e W.
Definition b knows that S iff. S is true in all epistemic b alternatives.
Reflexivity/Transitivity/Knowledge/Hintikka: we must assume here: If b can exclude all scenarios in W-W1, he can in fact exclude the assertion that he is not in such a position.
Knowledge/game theory/Hintikka: typical example for the acquisition of knowledge: cheating husbands or wise men. This is about the fact that the decisions of the players depend on the respective level of knowledge, and of what one expects the other knows.
"Inquirer": the inquirer asks questions.
Nature/Oracle/Opponent: the nature or opponent is the source of information.
Answer: an answer can be used by the Inquirer as a premise to derive a conclusion: C. This can only be about the question "C or not C".
Premise/T: the premise can be a fixed initial premise (the "theoretical premise").
Final rules: final rules can be limited to those that fulfill the subformula principle.
Question game: we call this an "interrogative game".
Advantage: the game theory allows us to investigate cognitive strategies, not just static cognitive situations.
Nature: the "Oracle" can literally be nature. The answers can be given by scientific experiments.
Restrictions: restrictions arise from the logical form, in particular the logical complexity, e.g. The prefix structure of the quantifiers for possible answers.
Sensory perception/perception/Hintikka: perception can only answer yes-no questions. (?). This corresponds to atomic sentences for logicians.
Experiment: an experiment, on the other hand, can provide responses that encode functional dependencies ((s) represent).
Prefix/logical form/experiment/Hintikka: the answer to an experiment must have a structure with a prefix "∀∃":
This can be extended: ∀∃∀ ...
Science theory/Hintikka: this structure is extremely important for the philosophy of the sciences.
Knowledge/logical form/Hintikka: it is very important that we have different kinds of knowledge.
For example, implicit knowledge must be treated in the model of a sub-oracle.
Knowledge/Hintikka: but neither implicit nor active knowledge obeys the epistemic logic!
Completedness: for it is neither completed with respect to logical reasoning nor completed when the relation of the logical inference is restricted.
Knowledge logic/Hintikka: we need a different logic of knowledge than the epistemic logic.
Definition knowledge/game-theoretical/game theory/Hintikka: the knowledge of the Inquirer consists of all the conclusions C, which he can find out in the questioning process.
Definition Virtual knowledge/game theory/Hintikka: ditto, except that the Inquirer is not allowed to introduce additional individuals here.
Knowledge-who/Identity/Psychology/Psychiatry/Hintikka: there are interesting examples here. One must be able to recognize oneself as the same in different situations.
Jaakko and Merrill B. Hintikka
The Logic of Epistemology and the Epistemology of Logic Dordrecht 1989
J. Hintikka/M. B. Hintikka
Untersuchungen zu Wittgenstein Frankfurt 1996