Response to concerns regarding the relationship between erotetic and propositional ignorance, highlighting refinements in understanding.
In his reply to my book Ignorance: A Philosophical Study , Christopher Willard‐Kyle zooms in on erotetic ignorance and the Significance Condition of my account of ignorance. Erotetic ignorance is lacking the answers to certain questions when the question is sound and when there is an answer to the question. Willard‐Kyle shows that my arguments for the idea that erotetic ignorance reduces to propositional ignorance are wanting. In this response, I address each of his concerns about this claim and also my earlier suggestion that an account of ignorance needs to take a Significance Condition on board. I argue that my thesis that erotetic ignorance reduces to propositional ignorance was, thus put, indeed too crude and Willard‐Kyle's sharp arguments and convincing examples made me see that. However, a refined and more complex version of the thesis can meet his worries.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Rik Peels (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: