Finding Closure for Safety

@article{Schulz2020FindingCF,
  title={Finding Closure for Safety},
  author={Moritz Schulz},
  journal={Episteme},
  year={2020},
  pages={1-15}
}
There are two plausible constraints on knowledge: (i) knowledge is closed under competent deduction; and (ii) knowledge answers to a safety condition. However, various authors, including Kvanvig (2004), Murphy (2005, 2006) and Alspector-Kelly (2011), argue that beliefs competently deduced from knowledge can sometimes fail to be safe. This paper responds that one can uphold (i) and (ii) by relativizing safety to methods and argues further that in order to do so, methods should be individuated… Expand
Close Error, Visual Perception, and Neural Phase: A Critique of the Modal Approach to Knowledge
The distinction between true belief and knowledge is one of the most fundamental in philosophy, and a remarkable effort has been dedicated to formulating the conditions on which true beliefExpand
Practical reasoning and degrees of outright belief
According to a suggestion by Williamson (Knowledge and its limits, Oxford University Press, 2000, p. 99), outright belief comes in degrees: one has a high/low degree of belief iff one is willing toExpand

References

SHOWING 1-10 OF 22 REFERENCES
Saving safety from counterexamples
TLDR
The overall goal is to show that there are no successful counterexamples to robust anti-luck epistemology and to highlight some major presuppositions of my reply. Expand
Is Safety In Danger?
TLDR
It is argued that Tomas Bogardus’s case just corroborates the well-known requirement that modal conditions like safety must be relativized to methods of belief formation, and proposes a plausible externalist principle of method individuation. Expand
The Modal Account of Luck
This essay offers a rearticulation and defence of the modal account of luck that the author developed in earlier work (e.g., Pritchard 2005). In particular, the proposal is situated within a certainExpand
Sensitivity, Safety, and Closure
It is widely thought that if knowledge requires sensitivity, knowledge is not closed because sensitivity is not closed. This paper argues that there is no valid argument from sensitivity failure toExpand
Why safety doesn’t save closure
TLDR
The purpose of this essay is to show that a popular variation on the safety theme, the safe-basis or safe-indicator account does not succeed: safety does not save closure. Expand
KNOWLEDGE AND SAFETY
this paper raises a problem for so-called safety- based conceptions of knowledge: it is argued that none of the versions of the safety condition that can be found in the literature succeeds inExpand
Probability and Danger
What is the epistemological structure of situations where many small risks amount to a large one? Lottery and preface paradoxes and puzzles about quantum-mechanical blips threaten the idea thatExpand
Replies to Critics
A strategy for assessing closure
This paper looks at an argument strategy for assessing the epistemic closure principle. This is the principle that says knowledge is closed under known entailment; or (roughly) if S knows p and SExpand
...
1
2
3
...