Someone here

What is the biggest problem in epistemology?

22 posts in this topic

How do you know anything at all?

Do you know anything? How do you know?

Edited by Leo Gura

You are God. You are Love. You are Infinity. You are Leo.

Share this post

Link to post
Share on other sites

One challenge for epistemology is in its application. Theory considers possibilities but application introduces further information. 

For example, Agrippa’s Trilema explores foundationalism, coherence, and infinite regression as justifications of knowledge. In application, how to discuss with a coherent but criteria-critical conspiracy theorist? 

Then there are analytical tool like defeater analyses. Again—how to apply these tools to justify what I do/don’t know in my daily life? What questions should I ask in ambiguous situations?

I also find identifying the contextual salience or logical relevance of claims to be difficult in practice.

(Contextual salience concludes that statement 1 is false but a logical relevancy concludes that statement 3 is false:


1. Sam knows his class begins at 1:00.

2. If Sam knows that his class begins at 1:00 then he also knows that his teacher did not cancel class.

3. Sam does not know that his teacher did not cancel class.)


Salience vs relevance is easier in theory. For example, if Sam knows that his class starts at 1:00, then he also knows that an evil demon is not misleading him to falsely experience his class starting at 1:00. Therefore, Sam does not know that his class starts at 1:00 (contextualist)—or the demon is irrelevant.

But distinguishing logical relevance from  contextual salience is difficult in practice.


Share this post

Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now