Erkenntnis:1-19 (forthcoming)
Authors |
|
Abstract |
Contextualists and Subject Sensitive Invariantists often cite the knowledge norm of assertion as part of their argument. They claim that the knowledge norms in conjunction with our intuitions about when a subject is properly asserting in low or high stakes contexts provides strong evidence that what counts as knowledge depends on practical factors. In this paper, I present new data to suggest they are mistaken in the way they think about cases involving high and low stakes and I show how insensitive invariantists can explain the data. I exploit recent work done on the distinction between flouting a norm and being blamed for that violation to formulate a rigorous theory of rational expected blameworthiness that allows insensitive invariantists to explain the data cited.
|
Keywords | Knowledge Norm of Assertion Contextualism Pragmatic Encroachment Insensitive Invariantism Stakes |
Categories | (categorize this paper) |
DOI | 10.1007/s10670-020-00259-8 |
Options |
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
Download options
References found in this work BETA
Knowledge and Action.John Hawthorne & Jason Stanley - 2008 - Journal of Philosophy 105 (10):571-590.
View all 23 references / Add more references
Citations of this work BETA
No citations found.
Similar books and articles
Beweringen En Het Dilemma van de Contextgevoeligheid.Mona-Ioana Simionescu - 2016 - Dissertation, KU Leuven
Experimental Philosophy, Contextualism and SSI.Jessica Brown - 2013 - Philosophy and Phenomenological Research 86 (2):233-261.
Subject-Sensitive Invariantism, High-Stakes/Low-Stakes Cases, and Presupposition Suspension.Michael Blome-Tillmann - 2020 - Episteme 17 (2):249-254.
Adapt or Die: The Death of Invariantism&Quest.Jessica Brown - 2005 - Philosophical Quarterly 55 (219):263-285.
Contextualism and Warranted Assertion.Jim Stone - 2007 - Pacific Philosophical Quarterly 88 (1):92–113.
Assertion : The Context Sensitivity Dilemma.Mona Iona Simionescu - 2018 - Dissertation, University of St. Andrews
Testing What’s at Stake: Defending Stakes Effects for Testimony.Michel Croce & Paul Poenicke - 2017 - Teorema: International Journal of Philosophy 36 (3):163-183.
Analytics
Added to PP index
2020-06-05
Total views
143 ( #81,753 of 2,506,014 )
Recent downloads (6 months)
27 ( #33,293 of 2,506,014 )
2020-06-05
Total views
143 ( #81,753 of 2,506,014 )
Recent downloads (6 months)
27 ( #33,293 of 2,506,014 )
How can I increase my downloads?
Downloads