Examines agglomeration of justification in conjunctions, suggesting new implications for epistemology.
A common motivation for denying the closure of justification under conjunction introduction is that it leads to paradox. In this paper, we argue that any adequate account of understanding involves rejecting the idea that agglomeration of justification across conjunctions is limited in the way critics of closure think it is, and we explore some of the epistemological implications of this insight.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Kelp et al. (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: