Losing confidence in luminosity

Journal article


Goldstein, Simon and Waxman, Daniel. (2021). Losing confidence in luminosity. Noûs. 55(4), pp. 962-991. https://doi.org/10.1111/nous.12348
AuthorsGoldstein, Simon and Waxman, Daniel
Abstract

A mental state is luminous if, whenever an agent is in that state, they are in a position to know that they are. Following Timothy Williamson's Knowledge and Its Limits, a wave of recent work has explored whether there are any non‐trivial luminous mental states. A version of Williamson's anti‐luminosity appeals to a safety‐theoretic principle connecting knowledge and confidence: if an agent knows p, then p is true in any nearby scenario where she has a similar level of confidence in p. However, the relevant notion of confidence is relatively underexplored. This paper develops a precise theory of confidence: an agent's degree of confidence in p is the objective chance they will rely on p in practical reasoning. This theory of confidence is then used to critically evaluate the anti‐luminosity argument, leading to the surprising conclusion that although there are strong reasons for thinking that luminosity does not obtain, they are quite different from those the existing literature has considered. In particular, we show that once the notion of confidence is properly understood, the failure of luminosity follows from the assumption that knowledge requires high confidence, and does not require any kind of safety principle as a premise.

Year2021
JournalNoûs
Journal citation55 (4), pp. 962-991
PublisherWiley Periodicals
ISSN0029-4624
Digital Object Identifier (DOI)https://doi.org/10.1111/nous.12348
Scopus EID2-s2.0-85089963980
Page range962-991
Publisher's version
License
All rights reserved
File Access Level
Controlled
Output statusPublished
Publication dates
Online30 Aug 2020
Permalink -

https://acuresearchbank.acu.edu.au/item/8w15v/losing-confidence-in-luminosity

Restricted files

Publisher's version

  • 56
    total views
  • 0
    total downloads
  • 0
    views this month
  • 0
    downloads this month
These values are for the period from 19th October 2020, when this repository was created.

Export as

Related outputs

Getting accurate about knowledge
Carter, Sam and Goldstein, Simon. (2023). Getting accurate about knowledge. Mind. 132(525), pp. 158-191. https://doi.org/10.1093/mind/fzac009
Language agents reduce the risk of existential catastrophe
Goldstein, Simon and Kirk-Giannini, Cameron Domenico. (2023). Language agents reduce the risk of existential catastrophe. AI & Society. pp. 1-11. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00146-023-01748-4
Attitude verbs’ local context
Blumberg, Kyle and Goldstein, Simon. (2023). Attitude verbs’ local context. Linguistics and Philosophy. 46(3), pp. 483-507. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10988-022-09373-y
Fragile knowledge
Goldstein, Simon. (2022). Fragile knowledge. Mind. 131(522), pp. 487-515. https://doi.org/10.1093/mind/fzab040
Contextology
Goldstein, Simon and Kirk-Giannini, Cameron Domenico. (2022). Contextology. Philosophical Studies. 179(11), pp. 3187-3209. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11098-022-01820-7
Sly Pete in dynamic semantics
Goldstein, Simon David. (2022). Sly Pete in dynamic semantics. Journal of Philosophical Logic. 51(5), pp. 1103-1117. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10992-022-09660-w
Knowledge from multiple experiences
Goldstein, Simon and Hawthorne, John. (2022). Knowledge from multiple experiences. Philosophical Studies. 179(4), pp. 1341-1372. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11098-021-01710-4
Counterfactual contamination
Goldstein, Simon and Hawthorne, John. (2022). Counterfactual contamination. Australasian Journal of Philosophy. 100(2), pp. 262-278. https://doi.org/10.1080/00048402.2021.1886129
Probability for epistemic modalities
Goldstein, Simon and Santorio, Paolo. (2021). Probability for epistemic modalities. Philosophers' Imprint. 21(33), pp. 1-37.
Mighty knowledge
Beddor, Bob and Goldstein, Simon. (2021). Mighty knowledge. Journal of Philosophy. 118(5), pp. 229-269. https://doi.org/10.5840/jphil2021118518
The normality of error
Carter, Sam and Goldstein, Simon. (2021). The normality of error. Philosophical Studies. 178, pp. 2509-2533. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11098-020-01560-6
Epistemic modal credence
Goldstein, Simon. (2021). Epistemic modal credence. Philosophers' Imprint. 21(26), pp. 1-24.
The counterfactual direct argument
Goldstein, Simon. (2020). The counterfactual direct argument. Linguistics and Philosophy. 43(2), pp. 193-232. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10988-019-09272-9
Free choice impossibilty results
Goldstein, Simon. (2020). Free choice impossibilty results. Journal of Philosophical Logic. 49(2), pp. 249-282. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10992-019-09517-9
Conditional heresies
Cariani, Fabrizio and Goldstein, Simon. (2020). Conditional heresies. Philosophy and Phenomenological Research. 101(2), pp. 251-282. https://doi.org/10.1111/phpr.12565
A theory of conditional assertion
Goldstein, Simon. (2019). A theory of conditional assertion. Journal of Philosophy. 116(6), pp. 293-318. https://doi.org/10.5840/jphil2019116620
Generalized update semantics
Goldstein, Simon. (2019). Generalized update semantics. Mind: A Quarterly review of philosophy. 128(511), pp. 795-835. https://doi.org/10.1093/mind/fzy076
Free choice and homogeneity
Goldstein, Simon. (2019). Free choice and homogeneity. Semantics and Pragmatics. 12, pp. 1-47. https://doi.org/10.3765/sp.12.23
Triviality results for probabilistic modals
Goldstein, Simon. (2019). Triviality results for probabilistic modals. Philosophy and Phenomenological Research. 99(1), pp. 188-222. https://doi.org/10.1111/phpr.12477
A stronger doctrine of double effect
Bronner, Ben and Goldstein, Simon. (2018). A stronger doctrine of double effect. Australasian Journal of Philosophy. 96(4), pp. 793 - 805. https://doi.org/10.1080/00048402.2017.1400572
Believing epistemic contradictions
Beddor, Bob and Goldstein, Simon. (2018). Believing epistemic contradictions. The Review of Symbolic Logic. 11(1), pp. 87-114. https://doi.org/10.1017/S1755020316000514
A preface paradox for intention
Goldstein, Simon. (2016). A preface paradox for intention. Philosophers' Imprint. 16(14), pp. 1-20.