Advertisement

Moral Particularism and Epistemic Contextualism: Comments on Lance and Little

  • Nikola Kompa

Abstract

Do we need defeasible generalizations in epistemology, generalizations that are genuinely explanatory yet ineliminably exception-laden? Do we need them to endow our epistemology with a substantial explanatory structure? Mark Lance and Margaret Little argue for the claim that we do. I will argue that we can just as well do without them — at least in epistemology. So in the paper, I am trying to very briefly sketch an alternative contextualist picture. More specifically, the claim will be that although an epistemic contextualist should commit himself to epistemic holism he can nevertheless appeal to epistemic principles other than defeasible generalizations in order to provide his epistemology with a structure.

Keywords

Epistemic Reason Information Dependence Epistemic Contextualism Epistemic Principle Prima Facie Reason 
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. Dancy, J.: 1993, Moral Reasons, Blackwell Publishers, Oxford.Google Scholar
  2. Dancy, J.: 2001, ‘Moral Particularism’, in E. N. Zalta (ed.), The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy, (Summer 2001 Edition), URL = 〈http.//plato.stanford.edu/archives/sum2001/entries/moral-particularism/〉.Google Scholar
  3. Hooker, B.: 2000, ‘Moral Particularism: Wrong and Bad’, in B. Hooker and M. Little (eds.), Moral Particularism, Clarendon Press, Oxford, 1–22.Google Scholar
  4. Lance, M. and Little M.: 2004, ‘Defeasibility and the Normative Grasp of Context’, Erkenntnis 61, 435–455.Google Scholar
  5. McDowell, J.: 1997, ‘Virtue and Reason’, in R. Crisp and M. Slote (eds.), Virtue Ethics, Oxford University Press, Oxford, 141–162.Google Scholar
  6. Pollock, J.: 1986, Contemporary Theories of Knowledge, Rowman and Littlefield, Totowa NJ.Google Scholar
  7. Stalnaker, R.: 1998, ‘On the Representation of Context’, Journal of Logic, Language, and Information 7; reprinted in Stalnaker, R.: 1999, Context and Content, Oxford University Press, New York and Oxford, 96–113.Google Scholar
  8. Timmons, M.: 1996, ‘Outline of a Contextualist Moral Epistemology’, in W. Sinnott-Armstrong and M. Timmons (eds.), Moral Knowledge, Oxford University Press, Oxford and New York, 293–325.Google Scholar
  9. Williams, M.: 2001, Problems of Knowledge: A Critical Introduction to Epistemology, Oxford University Press, Oxford and New York.Google Scholar
  10. Wittgenstein, L.: 1969, On Certainty, Basil Blackwell, Oxford.Google Scholar
  11. Wright, C.: Forthcoming, ‘Wittgensteinian Certainties’, in D. McManus, (ed.), Wittgenstein and Skepticism, Routledge, London and New York.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Kluwer Academic Publishers 2004

Authors and Affiliations

  • Nikola Kompa
    • 1
  1. 1.Philosophisches SeminarWestfälische Wilhelms-Universität MünsterMünsterGermany

Personalised recommendations