Abstract

“ev’ry gambler knows that the secret to survivin’ is knowin’ what to throw away and knowing what to keep.” (Kenny Rogers)How should one understand knowledge‐whascriptions? That is, how should one understand claims such as “I know where the car is parked,” which feature an interrogative complement? The received view is that knowledge‐whreduces to knowledge thatp, wherephappens to be the answer to the questionQdenoted by thewh‐clause. I will argue that knowledge‐whincludes the question—to know‐whis to know thatp,as the answer to Q. I will then argue that knowledge‐thatincludes a contextually implicit question. I will conclude thatknowledge is a question‐relative state. Knowing is knowing the answer, and whether one knows the answer depends (in part) on the question.

Full Text
Paper version not known

Talk to us

Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have

Schedule a call