Sujet : Re: I just fixed the loophole of the Gettier cases with mt new notion of {linguistic truth}
De : mikko.levanto (at) *nospam* iki.fi (Mikko)
Groupes : comp.theoryDate : 06. Sep 2024, 11:39:43
Autres entêtes
Organisation : -
Message-ID : <vbem5f$pont$1@dont-email.me>
References : 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
User-Agent : Unison/2.2
On 2024-09-05 12:58:13 +0000, olcott said:
On 9/5/2024 2:20 AM, Mikko wrote:
On 2024-09-03 13:03:51 +0000, olcott said:
On 9/3/2024 3:39 AM, Mikko wrote:
On 2024-09-02 13:33:36 +0000, olcott said:
On 9/1/2024 5:58 AM, Mikko wrote:
On 2024-09-01 03:04:43 +0000, olcott said:
*I just fixed the loophole of the Gettier cases*
knowledge is a justified true belief such that the
justification is sufficient reason to accept the
truth of the belief.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gettier_problem
The remaining loophole is the lack of an exact definition
of "sufficient reason".
Ultimately sufficient reason is correct semantic
entailment from verified facts.
The problem is "verified" facts: what is sufficient verification?
Stipulated to be true is always sufficient:
Cats are a know if animal.
Insufficient for practtical purposes. You may stipulate that
nitroglycerine is not poison but it can kill you anyway.
The point is that <is> the way the linguistic truth actually works.
I've never seen or heard any linguist say so. The term has been used
by DG Schwartz in 1985.
-- Mikko
…