{"title":"制造者的知识,在先验和后验之间","authors":"L. Floridi","doi":"10.1093/OSO/9780198833635.003.0009","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"If Alice’s knowledge is the knowledge enjoyed by a maker how can this be qualified according to the three classic distinctions, which specify that truths can be necessary vs. contingent, analytic vs. synthetic, and a priori vs. a posteriori? This chapter argues that (a) we need to decouple a fourth distinction, namely informative vs. uninformative, from the previous three and, in particular, from its implicit association with analytic vs. synthetic and a priori vs. a posteriori; (b) such a decoupling facilitates, and is facilitated by, moving from a monoagent to a multiagent approach; (c) the decoupling and the multiagent approach enable a re-mapping of currently available positions in epistemology on these four dichotomies; (d) within such a re-mapping, two positions, capturing the nature of a witness’s knowledge and of a maker’s knowledge, can best be described as contingent, synthetic, a posteriori, and uninformative and as contingent, synthetic, weakly a priori (ab anteriori), and uninformative respectively.","PeriodicalId":178465,"journal":{"name":"The Logic of Information","volume":"4 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2019-02-28","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Maker’s Knowledge, between A Priori and A Posteriori\",\"authors\":\"L. Floridi\",\"doi\":\"10.1093/OSO/9780198833635.003.0009\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"If Alice’s knowledge is the knowledge enjoyed by a maker how can this be qualified according to the three classic distinctions, which specify that truths can be necessary vs. contingent, analytic vs. synthetic, and a priori vs. a posteriori? This chapter argues that (a) we need to decouple a fourth distinction, namely informative vs. uninformative, from the previous three and, in particular, from its implicit association with analytic vs. synthetic and a priori vs. a posteriori; (b) such a decoupling facilitates, and is facilitated by, moving from a monoagent to a multiagent approach; (c) the decoupling and the multiagent approach enable a re-mapping of currently available positions in epistemology on these four dichotomies; (d) within such a re-mapping, two positions, capturing the nature of a witness’s knowledge and of a maker’s knowledge, can best be described as contingent, synthetic, a posteriori, and uninformative and as contingent, synthetic, weakly a priori (ab anteriori), and uninformative respectively.\",\"PeriodicalId\":178465,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"The Logic of Information\",\"volume\":\"4 1\",\"pages\":\"0\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2019-02-28\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"The Logic of Information\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1093/OSO/9780198833635.003.0009\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"The Logic of Information","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1093/OSO/9780198833635.003.0009","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
Maker’s Knowledge, between A Priori and A Posteriori
If Alice’s knowledge is the knowledge enjoyed by a maker how can this be qualified according to the three classic distinctions, which specify that truths can be necessary vs. contingent, analytic vs. synthetic, and a priori vs. a posteriori? This chapter argues that (a) we need to decouple a fourth distinction, namely informative vs. uninformative, from the previous three and, in particular, from its implicit association with analytic vs. synthetic and a priori vs. a posteriori; (b) such a decoupling facilitates, and is facilitated by, moving from a monoagent to a multiagent approach; (c) the decoupling and the multiagent approach enable a re-mapping of currently available positions in epistemology on these four dichotomies; (d) within such a re-mapping, two positions, capturing the nature of a witness’s knowledge and of a maker’s knowledge, can best be described as contingent, synthetic, a posteriori, and uninformative and as contingent, synthetic, weakly a priori (ab anteriori), and uninformative respectively.