KK thesis

Last updated

The KK thesis or KK principle (also known as epistemic transparency or positive introspection [1] [2] ) is a principle of epistemic logic which states that "If you know that P is the case then you know that you know that P is the case." [3] This means that one cannot know that P is, if one does not know whether one's knowledge of P is correct. [4] Its application in science can be expressed in the way that it must not only justify its knowledge claims but it must also justify its method of justifying. [5] The principle is also described as knowledge-reflexivity contention. [6]

Contents

Principle

In formal notation, the principle can be stated as: "Kp→KKp" (literally: "Knowing p implies the knowing of knowing p"). [7] It is said that the wide acceptance of the thesis steered many philosophers of science towards skepticism since the thesis features infinite regress and that to know is interpreted as "to know with certainty that one knows". [4] The principle also holds that informational independence has epistemological consequences. [8] An application of the principle may involve Hume's skepticism, which holds that it is not possible to know the induction hypothesis needed to determine the derivative knowledge that P from what is already known. This finally leads to the Humean skeptical conclusion if it is attained using KK hypothesis. [4]

An account goes as far as saying that the thesis is false due to these reasons since any argument that depends upon it is unsatisfactory. [9] It is also said that the thesis had been disputed since the introduction of the epistemic logic by Jaakko Hintikka in 1962. [8] There are contemporary epistemologists who pointed out that skepticism can be rejected by rejecting the KK principle but to do so means one is also rejecting the idea of knowledge. [10]

Acceptance

While major philosophers of the past (Plato, Aristotle, Augustine, Shopenhauer) endorsed the principle, in the beginning of the 21st century the acceptance of the KK thesis widely varies between the epistemologists. Some reject it outright: Daniel Greco (who might be supporting the thesis) says that principle had "seen better days", Louise Antony speaks of it as "roundly rejected". Most externalists also reject the thesis, but statements by internalists, while not explicitly declaring acceptance, contain supportive language. [2]

Timothy Williamson presented a "very influential" attack on the KK principle in 2000 in his book "Knowledge and its Limits". [2]

History

The KK thesis has been associated with the notion of the infallibility of knowledge since ancient philosophers sometimes characterized the latter according to the former's terms. [11] Plato's view on infallibility, for example, can be approached according to its framework, particularly concerning his position stated in Theatetus that truth can only be attained by infallibly knowing it. [11]

Jaakko Hintikka, argued that the plausibility of the KK thesis turns upon the acceptance of a strong notion of knowledge and that it is also in part constitutive of that notion. [12] He traced the thesis' earliest iteration in Plato's Charmides and the Book of Lambda of Aristotle's Metaphysics . [12] He also cited examples drawn from other points of philosophical history, citing the works of Augustine, Averoes, Thomas Aquinas, and Baruch Spinoza, among others. [13] In response to the critique about the implausibility of the KK thesis, Hintikka stated that it is not an important point because what matters is that the principle is able "to capture a strong sense of knowledge". [14]

Modern formulations of the thesis sometimes include qualifications requiring, for example, "normal conditions for psychological self-knowledge". [2]

See also

Notes and references

  1. Cresto 2012, p. 923.
  2. 1 2 3 4 Azzouni 2020, p. 171.
  3. Bunnin, Nicholas; Yu, Jiyuan (2004). The Blackwell Dictionary of Western Philosophy. Blackwell Publishing Limited. p. 776. ISBN   978-1-4051-0679-5.
  4. 1 2 3 Hunt, Shelby (2003). Controversy in Marketing Theory: For Reason, Realism, Truth, and Objectivity. Armonk, NY: M.E. Sharpe. p. 94. ISBN   0765609312.
  5. Hunt, Shelby (2003). Controversy in Marketing Theory: For Reason, Realism, Truth, and Objectivity. Armonk, NY: M.E. Sharpe. p. 94. ISBN   0765609312.
  6. Rescher, Nicholas (2005). Epistemic Logic: A Survey of the Logic of Knowledge. Pittsburgh, PA: University of Pittsburgh Press. p. 22. ISBN   0-8229-4246-1.
  7. Carruthers, Peter (1992). Human Knowledge and Human Nature: A New Introduction to an Ancient Debate. Oxford University Press, USA. p. 208. ISBN   978-0-19-875102-1.
  8. 1 2 Rahman, Shahid; Symons, John; Gabbay, Dov M.; bendegem, jean paul van (2009). Logic, Epistemology, and the Unity of Science. Dordrecht: Springer Science & Business Media. p. 92. ISBN   978-1-4020-2807-6.
  9. Barnes, Jonathan (2007). The Toils of Scepticism. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press. p. 142. ISBN   9780521043878.
  10. Doyle, Casey; Milburn, Joseph; Pritchard, Duncan (2019). New Issues in Epistemological Disjunctivism. Oxon: Routledge. ISBN   978-1-351-60355-3.
  11. 1 2 Gerson, Lloyd P. (2009). Ancient Epistemology. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. p. 56. ISBN   9780521871396.
  12. 1 2 Lagerlund, Henrik (2007). Forming the Mind: Essays on the Internal Senses and the Mind/Body Problem from Avicenna to the Medical Enlightenment. Dordrecht: Springer. pp. 94–95. ISBN   9781402060830.
  13. Ditmarsch, Hans van; Sandu, Gabriel (2018-01-31). Jaakko Hintikka on Knowledge and Game-Theoretical Semantics. Cham, Switzerland: Springer. p. 418. ISBN   9783319628646.
  14. Bogdan, R. (1987). Jaakko Hintikka. Dordrecht: Springer Science & Business Media. p. 310. ISBN   9789027724021.

Sources

Related Research Articles

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Epistemology</span> Branch of philosophy concerning knowledge

Epistemology is the branch of philosophy concerned with knowledge, and is considered a major subfield of philosophy, along with other major subfields such as ethics, logic, and metaphysics. Epistemologists study the nature, origin, and scope of knowledge, epistemic justification, the rationality of belief, and various related issues. Debates in epistemology are generally clustered around four core areas:

  1. The philosophical analysis of the nature of knowledge and the conditions required for a belief to constitute knowledge, such as truth and justification
  2. Potential sources of knowledge and justified belief, such as perception, reason, memory, and testimony
  3. The structure of a body of knowledge or justified belief, including whether all justified beliefs must be derived from justified foundational beliefs or whether justification requires only a coherent set of beliefs
  4. Philosophical skepticism, which questions the possibility of knowledge, and related problems, such as whether skepticism poses a threat to our ordinary knowledge claims and whether it is possible to refute skeptical arguments

Justification is the property of belief that qualifies it as knowledge rather than mere opinion. Epistemology is the study of reasons that someone holds a rationally admissible belief. Epistemologists are concerned with various epistemic features of belief, which include the ideas of warrant, knowledge, rationality, and probability, among others.

In philosophy, rationalism is the epistemological view that "regards reason as the chief source and test of knowledge" or "any view appealing to reason as a source of knowledge or justification", often in contrast to other possible sources of knowledge such as faith, tradition, or sensory experience. More formally, rationalism is defined as a methodology or a theory "in which the criterion of truth is not sensory but intellectual and deductive".

Moore's paradox concerns the apparent absurdity involved in asserting a first-person present-tense sentence such as "It is raining, but I do not believe that it is raining" or "It is raining, but I believe that it is not raining." The first author to note this apparent absurdity was G. E. Moore. These 'Moorean' sentences, as they have become known, are paradoxical in that while they appear absurd, they nevertheless

  1. Can be true;
  2. Are (logically) consistent; and
  3. Are not (obviously) contradictions.
<span class="mw-page-title-main">Knowledge</span> Awareness of facts or being competent

Knowledge is a form of awareness or familiarity. It is often understood as awareness of facts or as practical skills, and may also mean familiarity with objects or situations. Knowledge of facts, also called propositional knowledge, is often defined as true belief that is distinct from opinion or guesswork by virtue of justification. While there is wide agreement among philosophers that propositional knowledge is a form of true belief, many controversies in philosophy focus on justification. This includes questions like whether justification is needed at all, how to understand it, and whether something else besides it is needed. These controversies intensified due to a series of thought experiments by Edmund Gettier and have provoked various alternative definitions. Some of them deny that justification is necessary and suggest alternative criteria. Others accept that justification is an essential aspect and formulate additional requirements.

Evidentialism is a thesis in epistemology which states that one is justified to believe something if and only if that person has evidence which supports said belief. Evidentialism is, therefore, a thesis about which beliefs are justified and which are not.

Perspectivism is the epistemological principle that perception of and knowledge of something are always bound to the interpretive perspectives of those observing it. While perspectivism does not regard all perspectives and interpretations as being of equal truth or value, it holds that no one has access to an absolute view of the world cut off from perspective. Instead, all such viewing occurs from some point of view which in turn affects how things are perceived. Rather than attempt to determine truth by correspondence to things outside any perspective, perspectivism thus generally seeks to determine truth by comparing and evaluating perspectives among themselves. Perspectivism may be regarded as an early form of epistemological pluralism, though in some accounts includes treatment of value theory, moral psychology, and realist metaphysics.

Contextualism, also known as epistemic contextualism, is a family of views in philosophy which emphasize the context in which an action, utterance, or expression occurs. Proponents of contextualism argue that, in some important respect, the action, utterance, or expression can only be understood relative to that context. Contextualist views hold that philosophically controversial concepts, such as "meaning P", "knowing that P", "having a reason to A", and possibly even "being true" or "being right" only have meaning relative to a specified context. Other philosophers contend that context-dependence leads to complete relativism.

Naturalized epistemology is a collection of philosophic views concerned with the theory of knowledge that emphasize the role of natural scientific methods. This shared emphasis on scientific methods of studying knowledge shifts focus to the empirical processes of knowledge acquisition and away from many traditional philosophical questions. There are noteworthy distinctions within naturalized epistemology. Replacement naturalism maintains that traditional epistemology should be abandoned and replaced with the methodologies of the natural sciences. The general thesis of cooperative naturalism is that traditional epistemology can benefit in its inquiry by using the knowledge we have gained from the cognitive sciences. Substantive naturalism focuses on an asserted equality of facts of knowledge and natural facts.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Jaakko Hintikka</span> Finnish philosopher and logician

Kaarlo Jaakko Juhani Hintikka was a Finnish philosopher and logician.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Fallibilism</span> Philosophical principle

Originally, fallibilism is the philosophical principle that propositions can be accepted even though they cannot be conclusively proven or justified, or that neither knowledge nor belief is certain. The term was coined in the late nineteenth century by the American philosopher Charles Sanders Peirce, as a response to foundationalism. Theorists, following Austrian-British philosopher Karl Popper, may also refer to fallibilism as the notion that knowledge might turn out to be false. Furthermore, fallibilism is said to imply corrigibilism, the principle that propositions are open to revision. Fallibilism is often juxtaposed with infallibilism.

Daniel Kolak is a Croatian-American philosopher who works primarily in philosophy of mind, personal identity, cognitive science, philosophy of science, philosophy of mathematics, philosophy of logic, philosophy of religion, and aesthetics. He is professor of philosophy at the William Paterson University of New Jersey and an Affiliate of the Rutgers University Center for Cognitive Science (RuCCS). Kolak is the founder of the philosophical therapy known as cognitive dynamics.

Epistemic closure is a property of some belief systems. It is the principle that if a subject knows , and knows that entails , then can thereby come to know . Most epistemological theories involve a closure principle and many skeptical arguments assume a closure principle.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Buddhist logico-epistemology</span> Epistemological study of Buddhism

Buddhist logico-epistemology is a term used in Western scholarship to describe Buddhist systems of pramāṇa-vāda and hetu-vidya. Pramāṇa-vāda is an epistemological study of the nature of knowledge; Hetu-vidya is a system of logic. These models developed in India during the 5th through 7th centuries.

Epistemology or theory of knowledge is the branch of philosophy concerned with the nature and scope (limitations) of knowledge. It addresses the questions "What is knowledge?", "How is knowledge acquired?", "What do people know?", "How do we know what we know?", and "Why do we know what we know?". Much of the debate in this field has focused on analyzing the nature of knowledge and how it relates to similar notions such as truth, belief, and justification. It also deals with the means of production of knowledge, as well as skepticism about different knowledge claims.

Feminist epistemology is an examination of epistemology from a feminist standpoint.

Dynamic epistemic logic (DEL) is a logical framework dealing with knowledge and information change. Typically, DEL focuses on situations involving multiple agents and studies how their knowledge changes when events occur. These events can change factual properties of the actual world : for example a red card is painted in blue. They can also bring about changes of knowledge without changing factual properties of the world : for example a card is revealed publicly to be red. Originally, DEL focused on epistemic events. We only present in this entry some of the basic ideas of the original DEL framework; more details about DEL in general can be found in the references.

In the philosophy of science, epistemic humility refers to a posture of scientific observation rooted in the recognition that (a) knowledge of the world is always interpreted, structured, and filtered by the observer, and that, as such, (b) scientific pronouncements must be built on the recognition of observation's inability to grasp the world in itself. The concept is frequently attributed to the traditions of German idealism, particularly the work of Immanuel Kant, and to British empiricism, including the writing of David Hume. Other histories of the concept trace its origin to the humility theory of wisdom attributed to Socrates in Plato's Apology. James Van Cleve describes the Kantian version of epistemic humility–i.e. that we have no knowledge of things in their "nonrelational respects or ‘in themselves'"–as a form of causal structuralism. More recently, the term has appeared in scholarship in postcolonial theory and critical theory to describe a subject-position of openness to other ways of 'knowing' beyond epistemologies that derive from the Western tradition.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Applied epistemology</span> Application of epistemology in specific fields

Applied epistemology refers to the study that determines whether the systems of investigation that seek the truth lead to true beliefs about the world. A specific conceptualization cites that it attempts to reveal whether these systems contribute to epistemic aims. It is applied in practices outside of philosophy like science and mathematics.

Definitions of knowledge try to determine the essential features of knowledge. Closely related terms are conception of knowledge, theory of knowledge, and analysis of knowledge. Some general features of knowledge are widely accepted among philosophers, for example, that it constitutes a cognitive success or an epistemic contact with reality and that propositional knowledge involves true belief. Most definitions of knowledge in analytic philosophy focus on propositional knowledge or knowledge-that, as in knowing that Dave is at home, in contrast to knowledge-how (know-how) expressing practical competence. However, despite the intense study of knowledge in epistemology, the disagreements about its precise nature are still both numerous and deep. Some of those disagreements arise from the fact that different theorists have different goals in mind: some try to provide a practically useful definition by delineating its most salient feature or features, while others aim at a theoretically precise definition of its necessary and sufficient conditions. Further disputes are caused by methodological differences: some theorists start from abstract and general intuitions or hypotheses, others from concrete and specific cases, and still others from linguistic usage. Additional disagreements arise concerning the standards of knowledge: whether knowledge is something rare that demands very high standards, like infallibility, or whether it is something common that requires only the possession of some evidence.