Knowledge-lies re-examined

Vladimir Krstić

Research output: Contribution to journalArticlepeer-review

1 Citation (Scopus)

Abstract

Sorensen says that my assertion that p is a knowledge-lie if it is meant to undermine your justification for believing truly that ∼p, not to make you believe that p and that, therefore, knowledge-lies are not intended to deceive. It has been objected that they are meant to deceive because they are intended to make you more confident in a falsehood. In this paper, I propose a novel account according to which an assertion that p is a knowledge-lie if it is intended not to provide evidence that p but to make you stop trusting all testimonies concerning whether p (in a room full of obvious liars, you will trust no one), which is how they undermine your testimonial knowledge. Because they are not intended to provide evidence that bears on the truth of p, they are not intended to make you more confident in a falsehood; therefore, knowledge-lies are not intended to deceive. This makes them a problem for the traditional account, which takes the intention to deceive as necessary for lying, and an interesting example of Kant's idea that allowing lies whenever one feels like it would bring it about that statements in general are not believed.

Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)312-320
Number of pages9
JournalRatio
Volume31
Issue number3
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - Sep 2018
Externally publishedYes

Keywords

  • intention to deceive
  • justification
  • knowledge
  • lies
  • trust

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Philosophy

Fingerprint Dive into the research topics of 'Knowledge-lies re-examined'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this