The epistemic analog of Moore's Paradox, formulated by Williamson, shows that a belief whose content explicitly contradicts the believer's own epistemic standing cannot constitute knowledge or reasonable belief.
?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.
The phenomenon whereby certain sentences are paradoxical because asserting them induces a contradiction between what is asserted and what the assertion implies about the speaker's beliefs
Reasonable belief(as contrasted with knowledge)
A belief that makes sense to hold based on good evidence or logical thinking, even if you don't know it for certain.
Williamson
# Williamson
Williamson most commonly refers to Timothy Williamson, a prominent British philosopher known for his work on knowledge, logic, and language. He's influential in contemporary philosophy for arguing that knowledge is more fundamental than belief and that traditional definitions of knowledge may be too restrictive. His ideas have shaped how philosophers think about what it means to know something and how language relates to reality.
knowledge(Distinguished from mere true belief, which may be the product of indoctrination and need not exercise deliberative capacities.)
Justified true belief — true belief that has been arrived at through the exercise of deliberative capacities, including comparison of and deliberation among alternatives.