Contextual shifts and gradable knowledge
(2023) In Logos & Episteme: an international journal of epistemiology 14(3). p.323-337- Abstract
- Epistemological contextualism states that propositions about knowledge, expressed in sentences like “S knows that P,” are context-sensitive. Schaffer (2005) examines whether one of Lewis’ (1996), Cohen’s (1988) and DeRose’s (1995) influential contextualist accounts is preferable to the others. According to Schaffer, Lewis’ theory of relevant alternatives succeeds as a linguistic basis for contextualism and as an explanation of what the parameter that shifts with context is, while Cohen’s theory of thresholds and DeRose’s theory of standards fail. This paper argues that Schaffer’s analysis is unsatisfactory since it fails to show that thresholds and standards cannot cope with skepticism, as it is ultimately the conversation participants who... (More)
- Epistemological contextualism states that propositions about knowledge, expressed in sentences like “S knows that P,” are context-sensitive. Schaffer (2005) examines whether one of Lewis’ (1996), Cohen’s (1988) and DeRose’s (1995) influential contextualist accounts is preferable to the others. According to Schaffer, Lewis’ theory of relevant alternatives succeeds as a linguistic basis for contextualism and as an explanation of what the parameter that shifts with context is, while Cohen’s theory of thresholds and DeRose’s theory of standards fail. This paper argues that Schaffer’s analysis is unsatisfactory since it fails to show that thresholds and standards cannot cope with skepticism, as it is ultimately the conversation participants who control how the conversation plays out. Moreover, Schaffer fails to show that gradability is of no importance in inquiries. (Less)
Please use this url to cite or link to this publication:
https://lup.lub.lu.se/record/cc6f4f2d-763f-4870-a5c0-cf065b8a5f32
- author
- Stephens, Andreas LU
- organization
- publishing date
- 2023
- type
- Contribution to journal
- publication status
- published
- subject
- keywords
- knowledge, contextualism, Schaffer, thresholds, standards, alternatives, gradability, gradualism
- in
- Logos & Episteme: an international journal of epistemiology
- volume
- 14
- issue
- 3
- pages
- 15 pages
- publisher
- Gheorghe Zane Institute for Economic and Social Research, Romanian Academy, Iasi Branch
- external identifiers
-
- scopus:85176112209
- ISSN
- 2069-0533
- DOI
- 10.5840/logos-episteme202314324
- language
- English
- LU publication?
- yes
- id
- cc6f4f2d-763f-4870-a5c0-cf065b8a5f32
- date added to LUP
- 2023-08-10 15:36:46
- date last changed
- 2023-12-30 04:05:37
@article{cc6f4f2d-763f-4870-a5c0-cf065b8a5f32, abstract = {{Epistemological contextualism states that propositions about knowledge, expressed in sentences like “S knows that P,” are context-sensitive. Schaffer (2005) examines whether one of Lewis’ (1996), Cohen’s (1988) and DeRose’s (1995) influential contextualist accounts is preferable to the others. According to Schaffer, Lewis’ theory of relevant alternatives succeeds as a linguistic basis for contextualism and as an explanation of what the parameter that shifts with context is, while Cohen’s theory of thresholds and DeRose’s theory of standards fail. This paper argues that Schaffer’s analysis is unsatisfactory since it fails to show that thresholds and standards cannot cope with skepticism, as it is ultimately the conversation participants who control how the conversation plays out. Moreover, Schaffer fails to show that gradability is of no importance in inquiries.}}, author = {{Stephens, Andreas}}, issn = {{2069-0533}}, keywords = {{knowledge; contextualism; Schaffer; thresholds; standards; alternatives; gradability; gradualism}}, language = {{eng}}, number = {{3}}, pages = {{323--337}}, publisher = {{Gheorghe Zane Institute for Economic and Social Research, Romanian Academy, Iasi Branch}}, series = {{Logos & Episteme: an international journal of epistemiology}}, title = {{Contextual shifts and gradable knowledge}}, url = {{http://dx.doi.org/10.5840/logos-episteme202314324}}, doi = {{10.5840/logos-episteme202314324}}, volume = {{14}}, year = {{2023}}, }