 Now given the principle of privileged access, Garrison can know a priori that he thinks that Donald is clueless. But as we’ve just seen, it is a logical consequence of Garrison’s having this thought that Donald exists. Hence, Garrison can merely deduce that Donald exists from something he knows a priori, and thus he can know a priori that Donald exists. But this consequence is absurd. Surely no one can know that any given other person exists without perceptual observation or empirical investigation. (A similar argument can be given for thought contents expressed by use of indexical pronouns and natural kind terms.)