 Edgington (1985) offers a situation-theoretic diagnosis of Fitch’s paradox. She claims that the problem lies with the failure to distinguish between ‘knowing in a situation that \(p\)’ and ‘knowing that \(p\) is the case in a situation’. In the latter case, the situation is (at least in part) that which the knowledge is about. In the former case, the situation is that in which the knowledge is had. For instance, I may know in my actual situation that I would be in pain in a counterfactual situation where my tooth is pulled. Importantly, the situation in which the knowledge takes place may be different from the situation that my knowledge is about. In a situation in which my tooth is not pulled, I may know things that are about a situation in which my tooth is pulled. 