The DOI matches its Crossref record.
How Must Knowledge Be Modally Related to What Is Known?
Overview
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
In the citing paper
“Earlier formulations of the safety requirement tended to focus only on the first way in which a subject could fail to be correct (see, e.g., see Sosa 1 3 1999a, Sosa 1999b, and Williamson 2000, 128).However, such formulations are now commonly taken to be too weak, as there are certain cases of coincidentally true beliefs that they fail to capture.”
From Hope for the Evolutionary Debunker: How Evolutionary Debunking Arguments and Arguments from Moral Disagreement Can Join Forces (2022) · cites this paper as Sosa 1999a
In the citing paper
“The Safety Requirement S knows that p only if there are no nearby worlds in which (i) she does not have a correct belief as to whether p and (ii) she uses the same method of beliefformation as the one we actually used to determine whether p is true.”
From Hope for the Evolutionary Debunker: How Evolutionary Debunking Arguments and Arguments from Moral Disagreement Can Join Forces (2022) · cites this paper as Sosa 1999a
Citations
Cites
Still being checked.
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Items 201–235 of 235
Kelly, T. J. (2022) · Oxford University Press eBooks · doi:10.1093/oso/9780192842954.003.0006
Greco, J. (2005) · Hybris · doi:10.18778/1689-4286.03.06
Induction, Conjunction Introduction, and Safety
Zhao, B. (2023) · Philosophy · doi:10.1017/s0031819123000190
The Safety Conception of Knowledge
Hawthorne, J. T., & Dietz, C. H. (2023) · doi:10.1093/oso/9780198866749.003.0007
Whiting, D. (2021) · doi:10.1093/oso/9780192893956.002.0003
Précis of The Range of Reasons
Whiting, D. (2023) · Asian Journal of Philosophy · doi:10.1007/s44204-023-00124-9
Domosławski, A. (2024) · Synthese · doi:10.1007/s11229-023-04450-6
Seeking a reflective equilibrium in the face of disagreement
Tersman, F. (2024) · Synthese · doi:10.1007/s11229-024-04729-2
Autonomy as Practical Understanding
Hadisi, R. (2024) · Ergo an Open Access Journal of Philosophy · doi:10.3998/ergo.6788
Is the Unity of Normativity Safe?
Whiting, D. (2025) · doi:10.1093/9780198927761.003.0004
Queloz, M. (2025) · Oxford University Press eBooks · doi:10.1093/9780198926283.003.0009
Queloz, M. (2025) · Oxford University Press eBooks · doi:10.1093/9780198926283.003.0002
Confidence, Reflection, and Knowledge
Queloz, M. (2025) · Oxford University Press eBooks · doi:10.1093/9780198926283.003.0004
Queloz, M. (2025) · Oxford University Press eBooks · doi:10.1093/9780198926283.003.0006
Queloz, M. (2025) · Oxford University Press eBooks · doi:10.1093/9780198926283.003.0008
Introduction: Appraising Concepts
Queloz, M. (2025) · Oxford University Press eBooks · doi:10.1093/9780198926283.003.0001
Queloz, M. (2025) · Oxford University Press eBooks · doi:10.1093/9780198926283.003.0003
Conclusion: Tailoring Thought to Need
Queloz, M. (2025) · Oxford University Press eBooks · doi:10.1093/9780198926283.003.0012
The Politics of Conflicting Concerns
Queloz, M. (2025) · Oxford University Press eBooks · doi:10.1093/9780198926283.003.0011
Queloz, M. (2025) · Oxford University Press eBooks · doi:10.1093/9780198926283.003.0007
Queloz, M. (2025) · Oxford University Press eBooks · doi:10.1093/9780198926283.003.0005
Smith, N. D. (2025) · Synthese Library/Synthese library · doi:10.1007/978-3-031-96041-3_4
Topey, B. (2025) · Synthese Library/Synthese library · doi:10.1007/978-3-031-98717-5_9
Madock, J. (2025) · Synthese · doi:10.1007/s11229-025-05395-8
The authority and politics of epiphanic experience
Queloz, M. (2026) · Zeitschrift für Ethik und Moralphilosophie · doi:10.1007/s42048-026-00250-y
Richardson, J. (2026) · Erkenntnis · doi:10.1007/s10670-026-01129-5
The Safety Versus Sensitivity Debate Revisited
Pritchard, D. (2026) · Philosophies · doi:10.3390/philosophies11040122
Objecting and quiescing, Aptly
Aird, R. J. (2026) · Noûs · doi:10.1111/nous.70061
Explanationism: A Brief History
Bernecker, S. (2026) · doi:10.1093/9780197866177.003.0002
Bernecker, S. (2026) · doi:10.1093/9780197866177.003.0005
Bernecker, S. (2026) · doi:10.1093/9780197866177.001.0001
Bernecker, S. (2026) · doi:10.1093/9780197866177.003.0004
The Abductivist Account of Knowledge
Bernecker, S. (2026) · doi:10.1093/9780197866177.003.0003
Bernecker, S. (2026) · doi:10.1093/9780197866177.002.0004
Bernecker, S. (2026) · doi:10.1093/9780197866177.003.0001
Metadata
- Authors
- Sosa, E., & University of Arkansas Press
- Corresponding author
- Sosa, Ernest
- ORCID
- Sosa, Ernest
- Venue
- Philosophical Topics
- Publisher
- Philosophy Documentation Center
- Published
- 1999
- Volume
- 26
- Issue
- 1
- Pages
- 373-384
- ISSN
- 0276-2080 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W2032232876
- Cited by
- 235
- References
- 0
- Citations by year
- 2026: 12 · 2025: 23 · 2024: 9 · 2023: 4 · 2022: 20 · 2021: 21 · 2020: 9 · 2019: 19 · 2018: 25 · 2017: 19 · 2016: 11 · 2015: 3 · 2014: 3 · 2013: 6 · 2012: 3
- FWCI
- 0.00
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- Philosophical Topics (publishedVersion)
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Arts and Humanities › Philosophy › Epistemology, Ethics, and Metaphysics
- Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › Logic, Reasoning, and Knowledge
- Social Sciences › Arts and Humanities › Philosophy › Philosophy and Theoretical Science
- Keywords
- modal knowledge, epistemic modality, truth and knowledge, epistemic logic
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
