# 知识论的悖论

> 【EN】Epistemic paradoxes are riddles that turn on the concept of knowledge ( episteme is Greek for knowledge). Typically, there are conflicting, well-credentialed answers to these questions (or pseudo-questions). Thus the riddle immediately poses an inconsistency. In the long run, the riddle goads and guides us into correcting at least one deep error – if not directly about knowledge, then about its kindred concepts such as justification, rational belief, and evidence. Such corrections are of interest to epistemologists. Historians date the origin of epistemology to the appearance of skeptics. As manifest in Plato’s dialogues featuring Socrates, epistemic paradoxes have been discussed for twenty five hundred years. Given their hardiness, some of these riddles about knowledge may well be discussed for the next twenty five hundred years. 【中】这类谜题长期鞭策并引导我们修正关于知识及其邻近概念——辩护、理性信念与证据——的错误，而这类修正正是认识论者所关心的；史家甚至把认识论的起源定在怀疑论者出现的时刻。词条涵盖预言决定论、预知问题、理智自杀、彩票悖论、序言悖论、反专家（知者悖论）、可知性悖论与摩尔问题。

- ID: m13199
- 分类: structure
- 领域: 逻辑学

## 定义

认知悖论是围绕“知识”概念展开的谜题（episteme 在希腊语中即知识）：对同一个问题存在相互冲突却各有凭据的回答，谜面立刻造成不一致，进而逼迫人们修正至少一处深层错误。 脚手架作用：- 压力测试直觉：把几条各自成立的知识原则放在一起推演，看它们何时相互撞车。 - 定位出错前提：从推出的矛盾倒推，锁定必须放弃的那一条看似无害的原则。

## 机制

知识概念通常与真、信念、辩护、闭合等原则相连；当这些原则在自我指涉、统计性证据或专家权威等情境中相互碰撞，就会从看似无害的前提推出矛盾，于是必须放弃其中某一条直觉。

## 练习

1) 复现谜题，摆出两个相互冲突却各有凭据的回答；2) 找出各自依赖的直觉或原则；3) 判断应当放弃哪一条；4) 检查修正后的方案是否波及其他概念；5) 用同类情境反复测试新方案。

## 脚手架用法

- 压力测试直觉：把几条各自成立的知识原则放在一起推演，看它们何时相互撞车。 - 定位出错前提：从推出的矛盾倒推，锁定必须放弃的那一条看似无害的原则。

[阅读网页](https://thinkingmodels.site/entries/detail/m13199)