Search results
Revisiting Amodal Completion and Knowledge. Haicheng Zhao - 2020 - Philosophia 48 (2):847-856. In a recent paper, Helton and Nanay, 415–423, 2019) present a new argument against two modal accounts of knowledge—safety and sensitivity. Their argument is based on the phenomenon of amodal completion.
Jun 6, 2024 · I then offer a systematic explanation of why it is the safety account—the main competitor of sensitivity—that picks out a more suitable set of possibilities. A consequence of this comparison is that the safety account delivers an overall more satisfying reply to the skeptic than sensitivity does.
赵海丞，男，吉林省吉林市人。 本、硕分别毕业于北京师范大学（2013.7）和复旦大学（2016.6）。 2020年6月于美国圣路易斯大学哲学系获哲学博士学位（博士论文题目：Better Virtuous Than Safe—A Study on the Safety Principle in Epistemology; 导师：John Greco）。 现为厦门大学哲学系副教授。...
Haicheng Zhao is a regular faculty at Xiamen University, Department of Philosophy. They are interested in Epistemology, Metaphysics, and Philosophy of Mind.
Haicheng Zhao's 6 research works with 6 citations and 52 reads, including: Can Sensitivity Preserve Inductive Knowledge?
List of philosophical publications by Haicheng Zhao (Xiamen University), including "Knowledge without safety", "Reliability, Accessibility, and Justified Credence", and "Inductive knowledge and lotteries: Could one explain both ‘safely’?".
Abstract. One interesting and potentially attractive feature of the sensitivity account of knowledge is that it not only preserves knowledge of ordinary propositions, but also concedes the skeptic's intuition that we do not know skeptical hypotheses do not obtain.
