←back to thread

303 points FigurativeVoid | 1 comments | | HN request time: 0.197s | source
Show context
nmaley ◴[] No.41842615[source]
Gettier cases tell us something interesting about truth and knowledge. This is that a factual claim should depict the event that was the effective cause of the claim being made. Depiction is a picturing relationship: a correspondence between the words and a possible event (eg a cow in a field). Knowledge is when the depicted event was the effective cause of the belief. Since the paper mache cow was the cause of the belief, not a real cow, our intuitions tell us this is not normal knowledge. Therefore, true statements must have both a causal and depictional relationship with something in the world. Put another way, true statements implicitly describe a part of their own causal history.
replies(3): >>41845135 #>>41846440 #>>41846603 #
1. bbor ◴[] No.41845135[source]
Dumb counterpoint: if it’s not a true belief, is it a false negative or a false positive? Any third option I can think of starts with “true”…

QED - proof by terminological convention!