机构:
CUNY, Grad Ctr, Program Comp Sci, 365 Fifth Ave,Rm 4329, New York, NY 10016 USA
CUNY, Grad Ctr, Program Math, 365 Fifth Ave,Rm 4329, New York, NY 10016 USA
CUNY, Grad Ctr, Program Philosophy, 365 Fifth Ave,Rm 4329, New York, NY 10016 USACUNY, Grad Ctr, Program Comp Sci, 365 Fifth Ave,Rm 4329, New York, NY 10016 USA
Artemov, Sergei
[1
,2
,3
]
Protopopescu, Tudor
论文数: 0引用数: 0
h-index: 0
机构:
CUNY, Grad Ctr, Program Philosophy, 365 Fifth Ave,Rm 4329, New York, NY 10016 USACUNY, Grad Ctr, Program Comp Sci, 365 Fifth Ave,Rm 4329, New York, NY 10016 USA
Protopopescu, Tudor
[3
]
机构:
[1] CUNY, Grad Ctr, Program Comp Sci, 365 Fifth Ave,Rm 4329, New York, NY 10016 USA
[2] CUNY, Grad Ctr, Program Math, 365 Fifth Ave,Rm 4329, New York, NY 10016 USA
[3] CUNY, Grad Ctr, Program Philosophy, 365 Fifth Ave,Rm 4329, New York, NY 10016 USA
We outline an intuitionistic view of knowledge whichmaintains the original Brouwer-Heyting-Kolmogorov semantics for intuitionism and is consistent with the well-known approach that intuitionistic knowledge be regarded as the result of verification. We argue that on this view coreflection A -> KA is valid and the factivity of knowledge holds in the form KA -> (sic)(sic)A 'known propositions cannot be false'. We show that the traditional form of factivity KA -> A is a distinctly classical principle which, like tertium non datur A boolean OR (sic)A, does not hold intuitionistically, but, along with the whole of classical epistemic logic, is intuitionistically valid in its double negation form (sic)(sic)(KA -> A). Within the intuitionistic epistemic framework the knowability paradox is resolved in a constructive manner. We argue that this paradox is the result of an unwarranted classical reading of constructive principles and as such does not have the consequences for constructive foundations traditionally attributed it.