Ma`rifat Falsafi

The Knowledge Argument is proposed to refute physicalism. Physicalism posits that everything is physical, suggesting that physical knowledge is sufficient to comprehend all aspects of the world. However, through an intellectual examination, the aforementioned argument demonstrates that even if we possessed all possible physical knowledge, we would still encounter certain phenomena (such as mental phenomena) that provide us with new forms of knowledge. Some critics have argued that even if the criticisms against the argument’s premises are set aside, the Knowledge Argument can, at most, prove an epistemic and explanatory gap between mental and physical phenomena. The present article focuses primarily on demonstrating that the Knowledge Argument does not fail to prove an ontological gap as well.