Assertion, action, and context

被引：0

作者：

McKenna, Robin ^{[1
]}

Hannon, Michael ^{[2
]}

机构：

[1] Univ Liverpool, Liverpool, Merseyside, England

[2] Univ Nottingham, Nottingham, England

来源：

SYNTHESE | 2021年 / 199卷 / 1-2期

关键词：

Epistemic norms; Assertion; Action; Contextualism; Relativism; KNOWLEDGE;

D O I：

10.1007/s11229-020-02705-0

中图分类号：

N09 [自然科学史]; B [哲学、宗教];

学科分类号：

01 ; 0101 ; 010108 ; 060207 ; 060305 ; 0712 ;

摘要：

A common objection to both contextualism and relativism about knowledge ascriptions is that they threaten knowledge norms of assertion and action. Consequently, if there is good reason to accept knowledge norms of assertion or action, there is good reason to reject both contextualism and relativism. In this paper we argue that neither contextualism nor relativism threaten knowledge norms of assertion or action.

引用

页码：731 / 743

页数：13

共 19 条

[1] Knowledge and Assertion [J].

Brown, Jessica .

PHILOSOPHY AND PHENOMENOLOGICAL RESEARCH, 2010, 81 (03) :549-566

[2] Knowledge and Practical Reason [J].

Brown, Jessica .

PHILOSOPHY COMPASS, 2008, 3 (06) :1135-1152

[3]

Craig E., 1990, SYNTHESE, DOI DOI 10.1007/BF00484707

[4]

DeRose Keith., 2009, The Case for Contextualism: Knowledge, Skepticism, and Context, DOI 10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199564460.001.0001

[5] Flexible Contextualism about Deontic Modals: A Puzzle about Information-Sensitivity [J].

Dowell, J. L. .

INQUIRY-AN INTERDISCIPLINARY JOURNAL OF PHILOSOPHY, 2013, 56 (2-3) :149-178

[6]

Eikmeyer H.-J., 1981, Words, Worlds, and Contexts. New Approaches to Word Semantics, P38

[7]

Gerken M., 2017, FOLK EPISTEMOLOGY WE

[8] What's wrong with contextualism? [J].

Greco, John .

PHILOSOPHICAL QUARTERLY, 2008, 58 (232) :416-436

[9]

Hannon M., 2019, WHATS POINT KNOWLEDG, DOI DOI 10.1093/OSO/9780190914721.001.0001

[10] The Practical Origins of Epistemic Contextualism [J].

Hannon, Michael .

ERKENNTNIS, 2013, 78 (04) :899-919

← 1 2 →