Switch to: References

Citations of:

Knowledge, Time, and Paradox: Introducing Sequential Epistemic Logic

In Hans van Ditmarsch & Gabriel Sandu (eds.), Outstanding Contributions to Logic: Jaakko Hintikka. Springer (2018)

Add citations

You must login to add citations.
  1. Conceptos de cognoscibilidad.Jan Heylen & Felipe Morales Carbonell - 2023 - Revista de Humanidades de Valparaíso 23:287-308.
    Many philosophical discussions hinge on the concept of knowability. For example, there is a blooming literature on the so-called paradox of knowability. How to understand this notion, however? In this paper, we examine several approaches to the notion: the naive approach to take knowability as the possibility to know, the counterfactual approach endorsed by Edgington (1985) and Schlöder (2019) , approaches based on the notion of a capacity or ability to know (Fara 2010, Humphreys 2011), and finally, approaches that make (...)
    Direct download (3 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  • Everything is learnable, once it is settled.Kevin Xu - 2021 - Synthese 199 (1-2):4795-4817.
    Since Fitch’s proof that not all propositions are knowable, philosophers have analysed the concept of knowability and sought a schema for the knowable propositions. A recent development in dynamic epistemic logic (DEL) has been to read ‘knowable’ as ‘known after an announcement’. Arbitrary Public Announcement Logic (APAL) and Sequential Public Announcement Logic (SPAL) are two DELs that have depicted this reading of knowability. We argue that neither APAL nor SPAL provide a satisfactory and principled schema of the knowable propositions. Instead, (...)
    No categories
    Direct download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  • Inexact knowledge and dynamic introspection.Michael Cohen - 2021 - Synthese 199 (3-4):5509-5531.
    Cases of inexact observations have been used extensively in the recent literature on higher-order evidence and higher-order knowledge. I argue that the received understanding of inexact observations is mistaken. Although it is convenient to assume that such cases can be modeled statically, they should be analyzed as dynamic cases that involve change of knowledge. Consequently, the underlying logic should be dynamic epistemic logic, not its static counterpart. When reasoning about inexact knowledge, it is easy to confuse the initial situation, the (...)
    Direct download (3 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   2 citations