Skip to content
Carmelics
TopicsThinkersChangesContributorsLoading account…

    Carmelics

    A reasoning platform. Break down any belief into clear reasons, explore both sides, and weigh the evidence honestly.

    Navigate

    • Topics
    • Search
    • Recent Changes
    • Contribute
    • How It Works
    • Glossary
    • Thinkers
    • Contributors
    • About
    • Statistics
    • Terms
    • Privacy

    Database

    Statements
    —
    Perspectives
    —
    Topics
    —

    Press ? for keyboard shortcuts

    LoyalLoyalJusticeJustice
    Made withinDC&Austin
    A necessary condition claim does not constitute a reducti... — Carmelics
    Statements
    321,452
    Perspectives
    108,905
    Topics
    42
    Home/Truth & Knowledge
    HistoryEditSee Inverse

    Part of a larger discussion

    Supports→Williamson's claim that safety is a necessary condition on knowledge is consistent with rejecting the project of analyzing knowledge.

    A necessary condition claim does not constitute a reductive analysis.

    Truth & Knowledge
    ?Rate how convincing each reason is below to see the overall strength.

    No one has weighed in yet. Be the first to share reasons for or against this statement.

    Sign in or register to share your perspective on this statement.

    Topics

    Truth & Knowledge

    Related

    Claiming safety is a necessary condition on knowledge means only that knowledge ...Williamson rejects the project of analyzing knowledge.Williamson's claim that safety is a necessary condition on knowledge is consiste...

    Similar

    Next step

    Based on where you are in your exploration

    Browse more in Truth & Knowledge
    Related propositions within the same area of thought.
    An objection to a sufficient condition claim does not apply to a neces...79%Mathematical analysis would collapse if the axiom of reducibility is a...79%Concepts can be legitimately understood without reductive analysis.79%A necessary condition argument is only established when rival explanat...78%

    Source

    AI-extracted
    SEP: knowledge-analysis
    View source passageHide passage
    Because safety is understood only in terms of knowledge, safety so understood cannot serve in an analysis of knowledge. Nor is it Williamson’s intent that it should do so; as we will see below, Williamson rejects the project of analyzing knowledge. This is of course consistent with claiming that safety is a necessary condition on knowledge in the straightforward sense that the latter entails the former.

    Details

    Type
    premise
    Perspectives
    0 (0 for, 0 against)
    Edits
    1 edit

    Open for perspectives

    This idea is waiting for its first supporting or challenging perspective.

    Share the first perspective