This preview shows page 1. Sign up to view the full content.
Unformatted text preview: (3) A is justified in believing that p, and (4) Any non-deductive inferences that A makes are based upon true premises concerning causal or nomological connections between states of affairs. There is a second reason for preferring this account to the "causal connection" analysis of knowledge. For the latter has difficulty handling the case where the causal connection is an unusual one - for example, the case mentioned earlier where the presence of a piece of chalk causes a laser to produce a holographic image of a piece of chalk. The "causal connection" approach needs to appeal, at this point, to some idea of "standard" causal connections. But on the approach just suggested, there is no difficulty. As long as one's reasoning employs justified, true beliefs about causal connections, one will have knowledge, regardless of the unusual character of the causal connections in question....
View Full Document
- Fall '09