8 ideas
19729 | 'Modal epistemology' demands a connection between the belief and facts in possible worlds [Black,T] |
Full Idea: In 'modal epistemologies' a belief counts as knowledge only if there is a modal connection - a connection not only to the actual world, but also to other non-actual possible worlds - between the belief and the facts of the matter. | |
From: Tim Black (Modal and Anti-Luck Epistemology [2011], 1) | |
A reaction: [Pritchard 2005 seems to be a source for this] This sounds to me a bit like Nozick's tracking or sensitivity theory. Nozick is, I suppose, diachronic (time must pass, for the tracking), where this theory is synchronic. |
19699 | A Gettier case is a belief which is true, and its fallible justification involves some luck [Hetherington] |
Full Idea: A Gettier case contains a belief which is true and well justified without being knowledge. Its justificatory support is also fallible, ...and there is considerable luck in how the belief combnes being true with being justified. | |
From: Stephen Hetherington (The Gettier Problem [2011], 5) | |
A reaction: This makes luck the key factor. 'Luck' is a rather vague concept, and so the sort of luck involved must first be spelled out. Or the varieties of luck that can produce this outcome. |
19728 | Gettier and lottery cases seem to involve luck, meaning bad connection of beliefs to facts [Black,T] |
Full Idea: The protagonists in Gettier cases and in lottery cases fail to have knowledge because their beliefs are true simply as a matter of luck, where this means that their beliefs themselves are not appropriately connected to the facts. | |
From: Tim Black (Modal and Anti-Luck Epistemology [2011], 1) | |
A reaction: The lottery problem is you correctly believe 'my ticket won't win the lottery' even though you don't seem to actually know it won't. Is the Gettier problem simply the problem of lucky knowledge? 'Luck' is a rather vague concept. |
23857 | People in power always try to increase their power [Weil] |
Full Idea: Every human group that exercises power does so …in such a way as to increase that power. | |
From: Simone Weil (Prospects: Proletarian Revolution? [1933], p.15) | |
A reaction: Not so true in smaller institutions, but at the centre of power you can control how power is distributed, so the temptation is too much. |
23856 | Spontaneous movements are powerless against organised repression [Weil] |
Full Idea: A spontaneous movement is fundamentally impotent when it comes to fighting against organised forces of repression. | |
From: Simone Weil (Prospects: Proletarian Revolution? [1933], p.2) | |
A reaction: Her example is the Paris Commune of 1870. Hence revolution requires prior penetration of the corridors of power. Hence the phenomenon of 'entryism' of more radical people into reformist parties. |
23859 | True democracy is the subordination of society to the individual [Weil] |
Full Idea: In the subordination of society to the individual lies the definition of true democracy, and that of socialism as well. | |
From: Simone Weil (Prospects: Proletarian Revolution? [1933], p.19) | |
A reaction: This is the simplest definition of the liberal view. The big difference is whether this subordination is the starting point of political thinking, or the end result at which it aims. |
23858 | War is perpetuated by its continual preparations [Weil] |
Full Idea: War perpetuates itself under the form of preparation for war. | |
From: Simone Weil (Prospects: Proletarian Revolution? [1933], p.16) | |
A reaction: There are periods when military preparations are scaled down, but a reason is always found to scale them back up again. |
23860 | Even if a drowning man is doomed, he should keep swimming to the last [Weil] |
Full Idea: A man who is thrown overboard in the middle of the ocean ought not to let himself drown, even though there is very litte chance of his reaching safety, but to go on swimming till exhausted. | |
From: Simone Weil (Prospects: Proletarian Revolution? [1933], p.21) | |
A reaction: You might survive a little longer if you don't exhaust yourself! Not clear where her authority for 'ought' comes from, but it expresses an interesting attitude. |