Desiderata for Theories of Awareness and Knowledge

Abstract

Abstract This chapter defends a range of desiderata a theory of knowledge and factual awareness ought to satisfy. In addition to previously discussed desiderata, this chapter argues that a theory of knowledge should explain the way in which knowledge is a success from an agent’s ability and it should also explain why knowledge is absent in cases of environmental luck and lottery cases. Leading theories of knowledge that attempt to explain these last two insights face three challenges: they are non-normative theories of knowledge, they seem unable to resolve Kelp’s safety dilemma, and they fail to explain results from experimental philosophy. Two prominent normative theories of knowledge are discussed: Dretske’s view of knowledge as belief for conclusive reasons, and Schroeder’s view of knowledge as belief for sufficient reason. Each is shown to face its own problems.