Examines puzzlement and its implications for understanding knowledge in epistemic states.
In this paper, I draw attention to a familiar yet overlooked epistemic state: puzzlement. We experience that by which we are puzzled as being in some way incomprehensible to us. Puzzlement is thus distinct from the mere absence of understanding. It is a polar rather than privative opposite of understanding. The distinction between puzzlement and the mere absence of understanding, I go on to argue, raises a novel problem for reductive analyses of understanding in terms of knowledge.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Samuel Dishaw (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: