Abstract

In this paper, I present and criticize two highly influential anti-skeptical proposals inspired by Wittgenstein’s (1969) remarks on ‘hinges’, namely Pritchard’s ‘hinge commitment strategy’ (2012, forthcoming a, forthcoming b) and Moyal-Sharrock ‘non epistemic strategy’ (2004,2005). I argue that both these proposals fail to represent a valid response to skeptical worries. Furthermore, I argue that following Wittgenstein’s analogy between ‘hinges’ and ‘rules of grammar’ we should be able to get rid of Cartesian skeptical scenarios as nonsensical, even if apparently intelligible, combination of signs excluded from our epistemic practices.