"Must We Know What We Say?" just got accepted to the Philosophical Review and will be appearing soon on a newsstand near you.
[UPDATE: Just remembered what day it is. Uh oh.]
Posted by Matt Weiner at April 1, 2005 02:04 PMCongratulations!
Posted by: ogged at April 1, 2005 02:31 PMThat is wonderful news! :)
Posted by: Diana Buccafurni at April 1, 2005 04:55 PMExcellent! Congrats.
Posted by: bitchphd at April 2, 2005 01:06 AMCongrats, Matt! (But what timing... -- I don't mean the date but the proximity to thick jfps...)
Posted by: Ted H. at April 2, 2005 02:44 PMYay, Matt!
Posted by: Matt's mom at April 3, 2005 10:52 AMI'm a bit late to the party, but well done as well. At the last APA everyone was taking for granted that knowledge is a norm of (or at least governing) assertion, and I think that some good papers in prominent places pointing out this isn't obviously true is a *good thing*.
Posted by: Brian Weatherson at April 4, 2005 08:12 AMCongrats, my man.
Posted by: bza at April 5, 2005 03:36 PMI'm *really* late to the party -- I just now found this, following the "Congrats to Matt Weiner!" link on the sidebar of TAR. Still, congratualations! That's great! PR is my favorite journal.
I agree with Brian that it's a good thing to have this suddenly trendy little doctrine (the knowledge account of assertion) questioned. I've been a believer long before the account became trendy. (First time I advocated it in a real publication was in my 1991 "Epistemic Possibilities," but it was in my dissertation so this goes all the way back to graduate school days, which, for me, is getting to be quite a while ago.) I guess it was Tim Williamson's prominent advocacy that's made the doctrine so popular now. But even Tim can get things wrong, I suppose. (Though I still doubt he's wrong about this particular thing!)
Posted by: Keith DeRose at April 26, 2005 09:00 PM