Abstract

On the assumptions that omniscience is knowledge of all facts and that knowledge is some species of non-accidentally true belief, I construct an argument that no being is omniscient. Any omniscient being would have to know its own omniscience, but there appears to be no way for that to be known, whether for a being who is supposed merely to be omniscient, but otherwise unremarkable, or for a being with the full panoply of theistic attributes normally supposed to accompany omniscience. The argument is premised upon assumptions about knowledge and omniscience that appear minimal and mostly non-controversial. Therefore, it is reasonable to believe either that no being is omniscient or that even the apparently minimal assumptions are problematic