Closure, Contrast, and Answer

dc.contributor.author	Schaffer, Jonathan
dc.date.accessioned	2015-12-07T22:18:44Z
dc.date.issued	2007
dc.date.updated	2015-12-07T08:24:32Z
dc.description.abstract	How should the contrastivist formulate closure? That is, given that knowledge is a ternary contrastive state Kspq (s knows that p rather than q), how does this state extend under entailment? In what follows, I will identify adequacy conditions for closure, criticize the extant invariantist and contextualist closure schemas, and provide a contrastive schema based on the idea of extending answers. I will conclude that only the contrastivist can adequately formulate closure.
dc.identifier.issn	0031-8116
dc.identifier.uri	http://hdl.handle.net/1885/18962
dc.publisher	Kluwer Academic Publishers
dc.source	Philosophical Studies
dc.title	Closure, Contrast, and Answer
dc.type	Journal article
local.bibliographicCitation.lastpage	55
local.bibliographicCitation.startpage	233
local.contributor.affiliation	Schaffer, Jonathan, College of Arts and Social Sciences, ANU
local.contributor.authoremail	repository.admin@anu.edu.au
local.contributor.authoruid	Schaffer, Jonathan, u4461808
local.description.embargo	2037-12-31
local.description.notes	Imported from ARIES
local.identifier.absfor	220304 - Epistemology
local.identifier.ariespublication	u4461808xPUB6
local.identifier.citationvolume	133
local.identifier.doi	10.1007/s11098-005-4545-x
local.identifier.scopusID	2-s2.0-33847648968
local.identifier.uidSubmittedBy	u4461808
local.type.status	Published Version

Downloads

Now showing 1 - 1 of 1