Concept of gradable knowledge

Dissertation, University of Edinburgh (2019)
  Copy   BIBTEX

Abstract

An orthodox view in epistemology holds that propositional knowledge is an absolute ‘yes or no’ affair, viz, propositional knowledge is ungradable. Call this view epistemic absolutism. This thesis purports to challenge this absolutist orthodoxy and develop an underexplored position—epistemic gradualism, which was initially proposed by Stephen Hetherington. As opposed to epistemic absolutism, epistemic gradualism argues that propositional knowledge can come in degrees. This thesis will examine motivations for endorsing absolutism and then, drawing on Hetherington’s original objections to absolutism, prove that absolutism is ill-grounded. In particular, I will explain why the primary ground for insisting absolutism, to wit, linguistic evidence from ordinary English language, fails to entail that knowledge-that is an ungradable concept. After that, I will revisit Hetherington’s two versions of gradualist theories—both will be revealed to be defective. Moreover, the current model of the debate between absolutism and gradualism constructed by Hetherington will give rise to an equivocal attitude towards the gradability of knowledge. That is, there is a prevailing equivocal view which agrees that knowledge can be improved by virtue of better justification but denies that knowledge is, by and large, a gradable concept. This thesis proposes to remodel the debate between absolutism and gradualism by basing it on a dispute about whether knowledge has a cut-off point distinguishing knowledge from everything that falls short of knowledge. Succinctly put, whether propositional knowledge has a threshold. It will be argued that gradualism, so interpreted, should deny that knowledge has a threshold, and treat knowledge as a spectrum concept analogous to ‘red’, ‘warm’, and so forth. The theoretical merits of this new model of the debate and the reconstructed gradualism will be shown. With a better-constructed gradualist account of knowledge in play, I will demonstrate how gradualism enjoys advantages over absolutism by illustrating gradualism’s potential applications in solving epistemological issues that absolutism finds difficult to address. For example, issues related to epistemic luck, faultless disagreements, scepticism, and the relationship between different types of knowledge.

Other Versions

No versions found

Links

PhilArchive



    Upload a copy of this work     Papers currently archived: 101,019

External links

Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server

Through your library

Similar books and articles

Epistemic Gradualism Versus Epistemic Absolutism.Changsheng Lai - 2021 - Pacific Philosophical Quarterly 103 (1):186-207.
Epistemic Gradualism's Argument from Components.Changsheng Lai - 2023 - Studies in Dialectics of Nature 39 (5):40-46.
Against epistemic absolutism.Changsheng Lai - 2021 - Synthese 199 (1-2):3945-3967.
Knowledge‐That as How‐Knowledge.Stephen Hetherington - 2011 - In Stephen Cade Hetherington (ed.), How to Know: A Practicalist Conception of Knowledge. Malden, MA: Wiley-Blackwell. pp. 169–218.
Know-How and Gradability.Carlotta Pavese - 2017 - Philosophical Review 126 (3):345-383.
Knowledge‐That as Knowledge‐How.Stephen Hetherington - 2011 - In Stephen Cade Hetherington (ed.), How to Know: A Practicalist Conception of Knowledge. Malden, MA: Wiley-Blackwell. pp. 26–75.

Analytics

Added to PP
2020-01-13

Downloads
66 (#315,242)

6 months
13 (#240,301)

Historical graph of downloads
How can I increase my downloads?

Author's Profile

Changsheng Lai
Shanghai JiaoTong University

Citations of this work

No citations found.

Add more citations

References found in this work

No references found.

Add more references