In 150 - 200 of your own words, please state which response to the closure principle for knowledge you think is most plausible, and clearly explain why.
Question
In 150 - 200 of your own words, please state which response to the closure principle for knowledge you think is most plausible, and clearly explain why.
Solution
The closure principle for knowledge states that if a person knows a particular proposition and recognizes that it implies another proposition, then they also know the second proposition. The most plausible response to this principle, in my opinion, is the Nozick's tracking theory. This theory suggests that knowledge is not closed under known logical implication. It argues that a person can know one proposition but not necessarily know all its implications. This is because knowledge requires not just true belief, but also the condition that if the proposition were false, the person would not believe it, and if it were true, the person would believe it. This condition may not hold for all implications of a known proposition. For instance, a person may know that it's raining outside because they can see it, but they may not know that the streets are wet, an implication of the rain, because they are not seeing it. This theory seems plausible because it acknowledges the limitations of our knowledge and the fact that we don't always recognize or believe all implications of what we know.
Similar Questions
There are number of different ways in which we might respond to the sceptic's closure principle argument. Give the following positions in logical space their correct name.The Closure Principle is false, as it is too strong. This means that, even though knowledge means the same in both cases, we can know things about the external world yet not know that we are not a brain-in-a-vat.Answer 1 Question 3The Closure Principle is true. As we do have external world knowledge, it follows that we also know that we are not a brain-in-a-vat.Answer 2 Question 3The Closure Principle is true. As we do not know that we are not a brain-in-a-vat, it follows that we do not have external world knowledge.Answer 3 Question 3The Closure Principle is true, but the key notion of knowledge is context-sensitive. If used in an everyday context, we do have external world knowledge and know that we are not a brain-in-a-vat; if used in a philosophical context, however, we do not know that we are not a brain-in-a-vat, therefore do not have external world knowledge.Answer 4 Question 3
In discussing Closure Principle arguments for scepticism, Fred Dretske suggests that the problem with the closure principle is that it requires us to be able to rule out all of the many things that are incompatible with our claimed knowledge. But this, he suggests, is excessive.Instead, when we are trying to determine whether or not someone is justified in believing something, Dretske suggests that we focus on whether they have reasons to reject all Answer 1 Question 4 alternatives, not all Answer 2 Question 4 alternatives.
Elaborate in a paragraph how conflicting principles during transfer of knowledge across contexts can lead to uncharted knowledge.
True or false: The Kauffman episode shows that the impact of a "crucial" experiment on supporting or refuting a theory is often less than assumed.
A theory is considered conclusive if the results of a study support predictions.True false question.TrueFalse
Upgrade your grade with Knowee
Get personalized homework help. Review tough concepts in more detail, or go deeper into your topic by exploring other relevant questions.