Lexicon of Arguments

Philosophical and Scientific Issues in Dispute
 
[german]


Complaints - Corrections

Table
Concepts
Versus
Sc. Camps
Theses I
Theses II

Concept/Author*  

What is wrong?
Page
Other metadata
Translation
Excerpt or content
Other

Correction: Year / Place / Page
/ /

Correction:
(max 500 charact.)

Your username*
or User-ID

Email address*

The complaint
will not be published.

 
II 168
Skepticism/Nozick: depends on that we acquire our knowledge indirectly.
II 198
Skepticism/Nozick: common form: claiming that someone could believe something even though it is wrong.

II 199
Punchline: the truth of
Condition

(3) "If p would be false, S would not believe it"

is compatible with the fact that a person believes p, although p is false. - Justification: condition (3) is not an entailment (Nozick: = formal implication).
>Entailment.
Condition (3) does not mean that in all situations, where not-p is applied, S does not believe that p.
Condition (3) can be true even if there is a possible situation where non-p and S believes that p.
>Situations, >Possible worlds.
Condition (3) speaks of the situation in which p is false.
Not every situation where p is false, is the situation that would prevail if p is wrong.
Possible World: condition (3) speaks of the next ~ p-world to our actual world. - It speaks of the not-p-neighborhood.
>Actual world, >Most similar world, >Similarity metrics.
E.g. Dream, E.g. demon E.g. brains in the tank - but only if p is false: - So only in the next non-p-worlds.
Even if we were in the tank, condition (3) could not apply.
>Brains in a vat.
II 204
Punchline: I do not know that I am not in the vat. - But I know that I write this. Because for this we have a connection, a trace.
II 209
Skepticism/NozickVsSkepticism: The skepticism is right that we have no connection to some facts, but it is wrong, that we could not connect to many other facts - including those that imply that we are not brains in a vat, so facts which we believe but do not know.
>Belief, >Knowledge.
II 242f
Skepticism/NozickVsSkepticism/(s): Conclusion:
1. I know that skepticism is wrong.
2. If the skepticism were true, I would not believe that I know much.
3. Because the assertion of skepticism that I do not know much, does not consist in the possibility of confusion with an illusory world, but simply in a world where you do not know much.
4. That I do not know that I am not a brain in a vat, is an isolated special case.
5. Even if I knew very little, I would still know that I am sitting on a chair 6. Even if that would be wrong, it would not follow that I am a brain a vat.

Found an error? Use our Complaint Form. Perhaps someone forgot to close a bracket? A page number is wrong?
Help us to improve our lexicon.
However, if you are of a different opinion, as regards the validity of the argument, post your own argument beside the contested one.
The correction will be sent to the contributor of the original entry to get his opinion about.