Epistemic contextualism can be stated properly
- 251 Downloads
It has been argued that epistemic contextualism faces the so-called factivity problem and hence cannot be stated properly. The basic idea behind this charge is that contextualists supposedly have to say, on the one hand, that knowledge ascribing sentences like “S knows that S has hands” are true when used in ordinary contexts while, on the other hand, they are not true by the standard of their own context. In my paper, I want to show that the argument to the factivity problem fails because it rests on the mistaken premise that contextualists are committed to the truth of particular ordinary knowledge attributions.
KeywordsFactivity problem Knowledge norm of assertion Epistemic contextualism Knowability problem
Thanks to Elke Brendel, Christoph Jäger, Geert Keil, Crispin Wright, Julia Zakkou and the participants of the EJK Seminar at Arché (St Andrews, 2013), Tobias Rosefeldt’s Lehrstuhlkolloquium (Berlin, 2013), the LOGOS Seminar and GRG (Barcelona, 2011) and Geert Keil’s Lehrstuhlkolloquium (Berlin, 2011). Thanks also to two anonymous referees for this journal. Very special thanks to Dan López de Sa for invaluable discussion at every stage of the development of this paper.
- Brendel, E. (2009). Contextualism, relativism, and factivity. Analyzing ‘knowledge’ after the new linguistic turn in epistemology. In A. Hieke & H. Leitgeb (Eds.), Reduction, abstraction, analysis (pp. 403–416). Frankfurt am: Ontos Verla.Google Scholar
- Brueckner, A. (2012). Skepticism and content externalism. In E. N. Zalta (Ed.), The Stanford encyclopedia of philosophy. Stanford, CA: The Metaphysics Research Lab: Center for the Study of Language and Information, Stanford University.Google Scholar
- Davidson, D. (1983). A coherence theory of truth and knowledge. In D. Henrich (Ed.), Kant oder Hegel? Über Formen der Begründung in der Philosophie (pp. 423–438). Stuttgart: Veröffentlichungen der Internationalen Hegel-Vereinigung, 12, Klett-Cotta.Google Scholar
- DeRose, K. (1999). Introduction: Responding to skepticism. In K. DeRose & T. A. Warfield (Eds.), Skepticism: A Contemporary Reader. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
- Hawthorne, J. (2004). Knowledge and lotteries. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
- MacFarlane, J. (2005). The assessment sensitivity of knowledge attributions. In T. S. Gendler & J. Hawthorne (Eds.), Oxford studies in epistemology (pp. 197–234). Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
- Montminy, M. (2008). Can contextualists maintain neutrality? Philosopher’s Imprint, 8(7), 1–13.Google Scholar
- Schiffer, S. (1996). Contextualist solutions to scepticism. Proceedings of the Aristotelian Society, 96, 317–333.Google Scholar
- Williamson, T. (2005). Knowledge and skepticism. In F. Jackson & M. Smith (Eds.), The Oxford handbook of contemporary philosophy (pp. 681–700). Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar