We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.
To save content items to your account,
please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies.
If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account.
Find out more about saving content to .
To save content items to your Kindle, first ensure [email protected]
is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings
on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part
of your Kindle email address below.
Find out more about saving to your Kindle.
Note you can select to save to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations.
‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be saved to your device when it is connected to wi-fi.
‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.
I present the debate on testimonial knowledge from non-knowledge. After explaining Jennifer Lackey's challenges to the received view that a hearer can only come to know p testimonially if the speaker knows p, I raise several difficulties for Lizzie Fricker's view, according to which testimonial knowledge is necessarily second-hand knowledge, and reject it on the basis of these problems. I then argue that Sandy Goldberg's case of safe testimonial belief from unsafe testimony survives Lackey's criticism. I offer a first comparison between inferential and testimonial knowledge from non-knowledge in terms of defeaters.
In this chapter I present the received view in the epistemology of memory, according to which one only knows p via memory if one knew p at an earlier time. I discuss Jennifer Lackey's counterexamples to this view and address Thomas Señor's criticisms to Lackey's cases. I explain why factual-defeater-based cases of mnemonic knowledge from non-knowledge should not be expected.
According to the received view in epistemology, inferential knowledge from non-knowledge is impossible - that is, in order for a subject to know the conclusion of their inference, they must know the essential premises from which that conclusion is drawn. In this book, Federico Luzzi critically examines this view, arguing that it is less plausible than intuition suggests and that it can be abandoned without substantial cost. In a discussion that ranges across inference, testimony and memory he analyses the full range of challenges to the view, connecting them to epistemological cases that support those challenges. He then proposes a defeater-based framework which allows the phenomenon of knowledge from non-knowledge across these three epistemic areas to be better understood. His book will be of interest to a wide range of readers in epistemology.
Recommend this
Email your librarian or administrator to recommend adding this to your organisation's collection.