The Analysis of Knowing A Decade of Research

271 Pages·1983·17.415 MB·English

by  Robert K. Shope

The Analysis of Knowing
Unauthenticated
Download Date | 9/3/17 1:25 PM
Unauthenticated
Download Date | 9/3/17 1:25 PM
THE
ANALYSIS
OF KNOWING
A Decade of Research
ROBERT K. SHOPE
Princeton University Press
Princeton, New Jersey
Unauthenticated
Download Date | 9/3/17 1:25 PM
Copyright © 1983 by Princeton University Press
Published by Princeton University Press, 41 William Street,
Princeton, New Jersey 08540
In the United Kingdom: Princeton University Press, Guildford, Surrey
All Rights Reserved
Library of Congress Cataloging in Publication Data will be
found on the last printed page of this book
This book has been composed in Linotron Times Roman
Clothbound editions of Princeton University Press books
are printed on acid-free paper, and binding materials are
chosen for strength and durability.
Paperbacks, while satisfactory for personal collections,
are not usually suitable for library rebinding
Printed in the United States of America by Princeton
University Press, Princeton, New Jersey
Unauthenticated
Download Date | 9/3/17 1:25 PM
To Judy, a joy to know,
and a fortunate counter to my example
Unauthenticated
Download Date | 9/3/17 1:25 PM
Unauthenticated
Download Date | 9/3/17 1:25 PM
Library of Congress Cataloging in Publication Data
Shope, Robert K., 1939-
The analysis of knowing.
Bibliography: p. Includes index.
1. Knowledge, Theory of. I. Title.
BD161.S49 1983 121 82-15099
ISBN 0-691-07275-2 ISBN 0-691-02025-6 (pbk.)
Robert K. Shope is Professor of Philosophy at
the University of Massachusetts Boston. He is a contributor
to many journals, including the Journal of Philosophy,
Inquiry, Philosophy of Science, Philosophical Studies,
and the Canadian Journal of Philosophy.
Brought to you by | Cambridge University Library
Authenticated
Download Date | 3/18/19 11:36 PM
Preface
The time is ripe for systematically reviewing the myriad recent con­
tributions to the search for a satisfactory philosophical analysis of
knowing. The present work considers the relations among the major
perspectives that have emerged during approximately the last decade,
and occasionally considers ways in which some of them might be
strengthened. However, I am ultimately concerned to point out the
difficulties faced by most of these analyses and to defend an analysis
of knowing in terms of what I call justification-explaining chains. I
concentrate throughout on that category of knowing which philos­
ophers sometimes call "factual knowledge." This is, roughly, know­
ing that such-and-such is the case, in contrast, say, to knowing how
to do something, or knowing a person. But at the end I have indicated
a direction for future research when analyzing types of knowing that
do not coincide with the important one which has most often preoc­
cupied philosophers.
The discussion provides an introduction to the analysis of knowing
for workers in related fields and for philosophers who have them­
selves not yet been entrapped within this particular thicket. Students
of philosophy will find an opportunity to obtain an overview from
which to extend their exploration of this central aspect of episte-
mology, as well as a sustained illustration of the role that is often
played in contemporary philosophical debate by the technique of
seeking counterexamples.
Brought to you by | Stockholm University Library
Authenticated
Download Date | 9/3/17 1:37 PM
Brought to you by | Stockholm University Library
Authenticated
Download Date | 9/3/17 1:37 PM
Acknowledgments
Initial impetus for this project came from an invitation by the Amer­
ican Philosophical Quarterly to contribute an article on recent work
on the analysis of knowledge. But that manuscript eventually outgrew
reasonable length limitations, and I wish to thank Gilbert Harman
for having encouraged me to turn it into the present volume, and for
having called it to the attention of the publisher.
My greatest debt is to Ernest Sosa, not only for having prompted
the initial invitation from the above journal, but for his constant
encouragement and helpful discussion of details of his views and
those of Roderick Chisholm.
My colleagues in the Philosophy Department at the University of
Massachusetts-Boston, especially Howard Cohen, provided guidance
concerning the appropriate arrangement of materials in Chapter 1,
and Martin Andic saved me from overbold conjectures in that chapter
concerning Plato. I am grateful to Roderick Firth for helping me to
keep the beginning of Chapter 6 from becoming intractably complex.
Finally, I acknowledge the assistance of the National Endowment
for the Humanities in pursuing this research.
Brought to you by | Cambridge University Library
Authenticated
Download Date | 3/18/19 11:16 PM