Outline of a logic of knowledge of acquaintance (original) (raw)
Related papers
Knowledge by Acquaintance: An Explication and Defence
UCL PhD Dissertation , 2024
Recently, there has been a renaissance of study on knowledge by acquaintance. One reason for this is that many writers believe acquaintance holds the key to understanding consciousness and our conscious experience of the world. For this reason, research on acquaintance has been primarily focused on perception and self-knowledge. While these questions are undoubtedly important, I believe being overly focused on these issues has prevented a defensible theory of knowledge by acquaintance from being developed. In particular, two questions have largely been ignored in the literature. First, what kind of knowledge is knowledge by acquaintance? If knowledge by acquaintance is supposed to give us special epistemic access to its objects, what are the central epistemic features of it and how do they differ from other kinds of knowledge? Second, can we have knowledge by acquaintance beyond cases of perception and self-knowledge, and if so, how? In this dissertation, I answer both of these questions. In response to the first question, I argue that knowledge by acquaintance is a form of non-propositional discriminatory knowledge. Roughly, discriminatory knowledge is the exercise of a discriminatory capacity to single out a particular object from other objects of its kind. It is non-propositional because the object of the mental act of discriminating is not a proposition or truth. It is important that we understand knowledge by acquaintance in terms of discriminatory knowledge because it allows us to move beyond perceptual knowledge and self-knowledge. In this dissertation, I show how this is possible by showing that we can be acquainted with the natural numbers. This provides an answer to the second question. There is, in principle, no reason why acquaintance should only exist in sensory perception, provided we understand it in terms of discriminatory knowledge. The upshot of this is that my account of knowledge by acquaintance has a breadth and unity not often found in the acquaintance literature.
Russellian Acquaintance Revisited
In Bertrand Russell’s writings during the first two decades of the Twentieth Century there occur two rather different distinctions that involve his much-discussed, technical notion of acquaintance. The first is the distinction between knowledge by acquaintance and knowledge by description; the second, the distinction between knowledge by acquaintance and knowledge of truths. This article examines the nature and philosophical purpose of these two distinctions, while also tracing the evolution of Russell’s notion of acquaintance. It argues that, when he first expressly formulates his Principle of Acquaintance in 1903, Russell’s chief concern is to appeal to the first distinction to argue against a certain tightly restrictive epistemology of understanding that he finds in the writings of William James. By contrast, when in 1911 he begins to place emphasis on the second distinction, his concern is to appeal to it in the course of defending his thesis that we are capable of having perfect knowledge (by acquaintance) of particulars. The defense is necessary because this thesis comes under attack from a certain argument Russell finds in the writings of the Monistic Idealists.
MODAL REALISM AND ACQUAINTANCE
This thesis explores modal knowledge. Modal knowledge is such that we are often confounded when we are asked to present justification for it. This is due to (1) the fundamental role acquaintance plays in the formation of knowledge, and (2) the seeming absence of acquaintance with modal facts. Since modal propositions are intelligible to us, then given Russell’s theory of knowledge, modal propositions are composed wholly of constituents with which we are acquainted despite (2). In this thesis, I argue that we can construct an acquaintance theory in the Russellean fashion for modal facts, and I call such theory ‘modal acquaintance’. Since acquaintance is sufficient as justification for knowledge, then our modal knowledge is justified through modal acquaintance.
On Denoting" and the Principle of Acquaintance
Russell: the Journal of Bertrand Russell Studies, 2007
While Russell's concerns in developing the theory of descriptions were primarily with his foundation of logic, he was aware of the epistemological uses of both the theory of denoting concepts and the 1905 theory of deWnite descriptions. At the end of "On Denoting" he suggests that the principle of acquaintance is a "result" of the new theory of denoting. In this paper I examine the relation between the theory of descriptions and the principle of acquaintance, and I reject two suggestions, one that Russell's view commits him to the position that quantiWers range only over objects of acquaintance, the other that the principle of acquaintance plays a crucial role in the Gray's Elegy argument.
National Conference on Artificial Intelligence, 2021
The paper suggests a definition of "know who" as a modality using Grove-Halpern semantics of names. It also introduces a logical system that describes the interplay between modalities "knows who", "knows", and "for all agents". The main technical result is a completeness theorem for the proposed system.
Acquaintance, Knowledge, and Value
Synthese
Taking perceptual experience to consist in a relation of acquaintance with the sensible qualities, I argue that the state of being acquainted with a sensible quality is intrinsically a form of knowledge, and not merely a means to more familiar kinds of knowledge, such as propositional or dispositional knowledge. We should accept the epistemic claim for its explanatory power and theoretical usefulness. That acquaintance is knowledge best explains the intuitive epistemic appeal of ‘Edenic’ counterfactuals involving unmediated perceptual contact with reality (cf. Chalmers 2006). It explains the elusiveness of knowledge gained through new acquaintances. It coheres with the knowledge-like functional role of acquaintance in the special context of evaluative beliefs and evaluative reasoning, where the objects of acquaintance serve as evidence and inferential basis. And, finally, taking acquaintance to be knowledge is theoretically fruitful: it helps vindicate claims about the relationship between knowledge and concern for others we already find intuitive or outright accept. After developing a novel case for the epistemic claim, I respond to two familiar objections against it: namely, (1) that there are no pre-propositional, pre-conceptual cases of perceptual experience that remain epistemically relevant (Sellars 1968, McDowell 2008); and (2) that the category of knowledge appears gerrymandered once we add ‘object’ knowledge to the epistemological mix (Farkas 2019
Acquaintance content and obviation
ZAS Papers in Linguistics, 2018
This paper is about what Ninan (2014) (following Wollheim 1980) calls the AcquaintanceInference (AI): a firsthand experience requirement imposed by several subjective expressions such asPredicates of Personal Taste (PPTs) (delicious). In general, one is entitled to calling something deliciousonly upon having tried it. This requirement can be lifted, disappearing in scope of elements that we willcall obviators. The paper investigates the patterns of AI obviation for PPTs and similar constructions(e.g., psych predicates and subjective attitudes). We show that the cross-constructional variation in whenacquaintance requirements can be obviated presents challenges for previous accounts of the AI (Pearson2013, Ninan 2014). In place of these, we argue for the existence of two kinds of acquaintance content:(i) that of bare PPTs; and (ii) that of psych predicates, subjective attitudes and overt experiencer PPTs.For (i), we propose that the AI arises from an evidential restriction that is dep...
What Acquaintance Teaches (final, revised version)
Acquaintance, edited by T. Raleigh, Oxford University Press, 2020
In her black and white room, Mary doesn't know what it is like to see red. Only after undergoing an experience as of something red and hence acquainting herself with red
Ontology Limits Epistemology: Russellian Acquaintance in New Realism
Cartesian and Kantian skepticism about objects has plagued philosophy for over three hundred years, culminating into postmodern subjectivism. Bertrand Russell's notion of knowledge by acquaintance recognizes that at the foundation of knowledge are facts presented by objects to subjects. These facts present limitations, which subjects may not amend. Thus, the notion that reality is merely a social construction cannot be true. Knowledge by description, using knowledge by acquaintance as its base, provides a defense for a positive realism that posits that epistemology proceeds from ontology.