Is Knowing Each the Same as Knowing All?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Preface_paradox

It is not uncommon that one might claim to believe that each individual assertion (P1, P2, P3, ... Pn) of a set is true, while not believing the whole, P, is true. The wikipedia article suggests at least one example, the author of an academic book, but one can think of several others. (If one struggles with other examples feel free to post a comment, and I'll write about several).

Wikipedia points out that this is likely not a paradox, and I agree. Rather, this is the appropriate kind of skepticism for all of one's beliefs.

It is increasingly common for people to say things such as, "This is merely what I believe." We are being trained, in order to avoid conflict, to avoid making statements about knowledge and truth. But surely most of us believe the things we say precisely because we believe they are true and that we are justified in believing them. This gives one the standard evidence for knowledge.

Skepticism about one's beliefs is valuable in our modern society, but being skeptical about each individual belief hampers discussion about what is true, precisely because no one is making any truth claims. Instead, skepticism in a sense like the Preface Paradox seems more appropriate.

In other words:

Speak in declarative sentences. Believe in truth. Speak with conviction. Make knowledge claims, not mere belief claims.

But,

Recognize that you are most likely, perhaps definitely, wrong about some things. Recognize your human fallibility.