Intuitively, knowledge is distinctively valuable, i.e., knowledge is more valuable than any of its proper parts. Call it “the distinctive value thesis.” Recently, the distinctive value thesis has been forcefully challenged by three arguments, which I call “the swamping argument,” “the generalized swamping argument,” and “the ad hoc argument,” respectively. These three arguments rely on what I will call “epistemic veritism,” the view that the distinctive value of knowledge is parasitic on the value of truth. Against these arguments, I argue that not only is epistemic veritism compatible with the distinctive value thesis, the former in effect implies the latter. My argument depends on the idea that justification enough for knowledge does not contain or presuppose certain falsehoods in a way that mere justification does.
CITATION STYLE
Lee, K. Y. (2021). On the Distinctive Value of Knowledge. In Logic in Asia: Studia Logica Library (pp. 107–127). Springer Nature. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-15-7230-2_7
Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.