Advertisement

Contextualist Approaches to Epistemology: Problems and Prospects

  • Elke Brendel
  • Christoph Jäger

Abstract

In this paper we survey some main arguments for and against epistemological contextualism. We distinguish and discuss various kinds of contextualism, such as attributed contextualism (the most influential version of which is semantic, conversational, or radical contextualism); indexicalism; proto-contextualism; Wittgensteinian contextualism; subject, inferential, or issue contextualism; epistemic contextualism; and virtue contextualism. Starting with a sketch of Dretske’s Relevant Alternatives Theory and Nozick’s Tracking Account of Knowledge, we reconstruct the history of various forms of contextualism and the ways contextualists try to handle some notorious epistemological quandaries, especially skepticism and the lottery paradox. Then we outline the most important problems that contextualist theories face, and give overviews of their criticisms and defenses as developed in this issue.

Keywords

Knowledge Claim Epistemic Position Knowledge Ascription Relevant Alternative CONTEXTUALIST Approach 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Alston, W.: 1993, The Reliability of Sense Perception, Cornell University Press, Ithaca.Google Scholar
  2. Annis, D.: 1978, ‘A Contextualist Theory of Epistemic Justification’, American Philosophical Quarterly 15, 213–219.Google Scholar
  3. Barke, A.: 2002, The Closure of Knowledge in Context, Mentis, Paderborn.Google Scholar
  4. Brueckner, A.: 1985, ‘Skepticism and Epistemic Closure,’ Philosophical Topics 13, 89–117.Google Scholar
  5. Cohen, S.: 1986, ‘Knowledge and Context’, The Journal of Philosophy 83, 574–583.Google Scholar
  6. Cohen, S.: 1988, ‘How to Be a Fallibilist’, Philosophical Perspectives 2, 91–123.Google Scholar
  7. Cohen, S.: 1998, ‘Contextualist Solution to Epistemological Problems: Scepticism, Gettier, and the Lottery’, Australasian Journal of Philosophy 76, 289–306.Google Scholar
  8. Cohen, S.: 1999, ‘Contextualism, Skepticism, and the Structure of Reasons’, Philosophical Perspectives 13: Epistemology, 57–89.Google Scholar
  9. Cohen, S.: 2000, ‘Contextualism and Skepticism’, in E. Sosa and H. Villanueva, (eds.), Philosophical Issues 10: Skepticism, 94–107.Google Scholar
  10. DeRose, K.: 1995, ‘Solving the Sceptical Problem’, The Philosophical Review 104, 1–52, quoted from the reprint, in K. DeRose and T. A. Warfield, (eds.), Skepticism A — Contemporary Reader, Oxford University Press, Oxford, New York, 183–219.Google Scholar
  11. DeRose, K.: 1999, ‘Contextualism: An Explanation and Defense’, in J. Greco and E. Sosa, (eds.), The Blackwell Guide to Epistemology, Basil Blackwell, Oxford, 187–205.Google Scholar
  12. DeRose, K.: 2000, ‘Now You Know It, Now You Don’t’, Proceedings of the Twentieth World Congress of Philosophy, Vol. V, Epistemology, 91–106.Google Scholar
  13. DeRose, K.: forthcoming, ‘Single Scoreboard Semantics’, Philosophical Studies, prepublication 10/10/2003, 1–21.Google Scholar
  14. Dretske, F.: 1970, ‘Epistemic Operators’, The Journal of Philosophy 67, 1007–1023.Google Scholar
  15. Dretske, F.: 1971, ‘Conclusive Reasons’, Australasian Journal of Philosophy 49, 1–22.Google Scholar
  16. Dretske, F.: 1981, ‘The Pragmatic Dimension of Knowledge’, Philosophical Studies 40, 363–378.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Dretske, F.: 2004, ‘The Case Against Closure’, in E. Sosa and M. Steup (eds.), Contemporary Debates in Epistemology, Basil Blackwell, Oxford.Google Scholar
  18. Feinberg, J.: 1970, Doing and Deserving: Essays in the Theory of Responsibility, Princeton University Press, Princeton.Google Scholar
  19. Feldman, R.: 1999, ‘Contextualism and Skepticism’, Philosophical Perspectives 13, 91–114.Google Scholar
  20. Goldman, A.: 1976, ‘Discrimination and Perceptual Knowledge’, The Journal of Philosophy 73, 771–791.Google Scholar
  21. Hales, S. D.: 1995, ‘Epistemic Closure Principles’, Southern Journal of Philosophy 33, 185–201.Google Scholar
  22. Heller, M.: 1999, ‘Relevant Alternatives and Closure’, Australasian Journal of Philosophy 77, 196–208.Google Scholar
  23. Kornblith, H.: 2000, ‘The Contextualist Evasion of Epistemology’, in E. Sosa and H. Villanueva, (eds.), Philosophical Issues 10: Skepticism, 24–32.Google Scholar
  24. Lewis, D.: 1979, ‘Scorekeeping in a Language Game’, Journal of Philosophical Logic 8, 339–359.Google Scholar
  25. Lewis, D.: 1996, ‘Elusive Knowledge’, Australasian Journal of Philosophy 74, 549–567.Google Scholar
  26. Nozick, R.: 1981, Philosophical Explanations, Oxford University Press, Oxford.Google Scholar
  27. Pritchard, D.: 2002, ‘Two Forms of Epistemological Contextualism’, Grazer Philosophische Studien 64, 19–55.Google Scholar
  28. Schiffer, St.: 1996, ‘Contextualist Solutions to Scepticism’, Proceedings of the Aristotelian Society 96, 317–333.Google Scholar
  29. Sosa, E.: 2000, ‘Skepticism and Contextualism’, in E. Sosa and H. Villanueva (eds.), Philosophical Issues 10: Skepticism, 1–18.Google Scholar
  30. Stine, G.: 1976, ‘Scepticism, Relevant Alternatives, and Deductive Closure’, Philosophical Studies 29, 249–261.Google Scholar
  31. Unger, P.: 1984, Philosophical Relativity, Minneapolis, University of Minnesota Press.Google Scholar
  32. Williams, M.: 1996, Unnatural Doubts: Epistemological Realism and the Basis of Skepticism, Princeton University Press, Princeton, New Jersey.Google Scholar
  33. Williams, M.: 2001, Problems of Knowledge: A Critical Introduction to Epistemology, Oxford University Press, Oxford.Google Scholar
  34. Wittgenstein, L.: 1969, On Certainty, Basil Blackwell, Oxford.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Kluwer Academic Publishers 2004

Authors and Affiliations

  • Elke Brendel
    • 1
  • Christoph Jäger
    • 2
  1. 1.Department of PhilosophyJohannes Gutenberg UniversityMainzGermany
  2. 2.Department of PhilosophyUniversity of AberdeenAberdeenUK

Personalised recommendations