A provisional epistemology of the JFK assassination
The nature of JFK knowledge
• The truth about the assassination
• External, objective
• Only one answer, but various impressions when viewed from different perspectives
• Very little is conclusive
• Most is conjectural, tentative
• Can be disproven but not proven
• Specifics can be settled better than generalities
The sources of JFK knowledge
• Requirements of any JFK epistemology (separate transparency)
• That amounts to a modified scientific or critical method.
• Other possible methods and their shortcomings (separate transparency)
• Modified scientific method (separate transparencies)
• Modified methods for uncertain knowledge (if desired)
• Example of method: the SBT
The validity of JFK knowledge
• What comes from strong evidence is certain.
• What comes from weak evidence is uncertain.
• Thus, nearly all knowledge proposed to date is weak and uncertain (opinion or belief)
The limits of JFK knowledge
• Can we know now who killed JFK?
• If yes, then “Who killed him?”
• If no, then “How close can we come to knowing now?”
• Will we ever be able to know who killed JFK?
• If yes, then someday “Who killed him?”
• If no, then “How close will we ever be able to come to knowing?”
• Examples of wrong questions to ask:
• Who had motive, means, and opportunity?
• Who benefited?
• Many questions may never be answered, even central ones.