The making-probable relation, if grasped via acquaintance alone, reduces epistemic work to phenomenal accessibility, collapsing the structural distinction Tucker's dilemma was meant to preserve.

?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.

Collapsing(as used in logical argumentation): In philosophy, this means showing that two things we thought were different are actually the same or equally valid.
Epistemic: "Epistemic" relates to knowledge—how we know things, what counts as knowledge, and whether we can trust what we believe to be true. It comes from the Greek word for knowledge and is used to describe questions about the reliability and validity of our beliefs and understanding. For example, "epistemic humility" means acknowledging the limits of what you can actually know for certain.
Making-probable relation(epistemology): The relationship where one thing makes another thing more likely to be true—for example, seeing dark clouds makes rain more probable.
Phenomenal accessibility(as used in epistemology and philosophy of mind): Whether something can be directly experienced or felt in your conscious awareness.

Based on where you are in your exploration