Nozick’s Tracking Theory: it is a version of JTB intended to rule out lucky
guesses; stating that instead of knowing something, it is also possible to track it
and notice it.
S know that P if and only if
(1) P is true
(2) S believes that P
(3) If P were false, S wouldn’t believe that P (need justification, evidence)
(4) If P were true, S would believe that P
Ex. An analogy of a thermometer, what makes it reliable?
(1) It must read 25 if it is in fact 25 outside
(2) What if it’s stuck? We need to test it and change the temperature.
Having a reliable brain is like having a reliable thermometer.
Objections to Nozick’s Tracking Theory: Premise (3) may be false!
Russell’s Clock: if it reads 12:20 but it is not, would you believe it?
Yes! Premise (3) proves false
Knowledge vs. Justified Belief: A dismissive reaction towards knowledge
skepticism. Fall back on justified beliefs and compare the degree to which some
beliefs are more supported by evidence than others.
PUN (Principle of Uniformity of Nature): An assumption that nature will act in
the future the way it has acted before. It is used to justify inductive reason and
Ex. The sun has risen in the past it will rise tomorrow.
Hume’s Problem of Induction: Deductively Valid! P1: All inductive arguments involve PUN (Principle of Uniformity of
P2: To justify induction, we must justify PUN
P3: To justify PUN, we must use either an inductive or deductive
P4: We can’t justify PUN deductively because we can’t deduce future
claims from past events. Cannot deduce uniformity.
P5: We can’t justify PUN inductively (it would be circular*, since all
inductive arguments presuppose PUN. We can’t use PUN to justify PUN)
P6: Hence, we can’t justify PUN
P7: Hence, we can’t justify induction
P8: Hence, all of our beliefs based on inductions and generalization are
When we say we want to justify PUN/induction, we want to justify the predictions
and generalizations that induction provides beyond our observations.
Max Black’s Rejection: yo