According to epistemic contextualism, the truth value of a knowledge ascription sentence varies in relation to the epistemic standard in play at its context of use. Contextualists promise a relatively conservative (dis)solution of the skeptical paradox that threatens to destroy our alleged everyday knowledge, based on our apparent inability to discard some exotic possibilities of error. The origins of the contextualist position have been traced back to some passages of Austin’s “Other Minds.” However, it is at best dubious whether the (...) alternative there explored is indeed contextualist. Austin seems to be proposing a much more radical position, one still ignored in the literature. This paper aims to develop an Austinian approach to knowledge attributions. I show how we could use the Austinian account to solve this skeptical paradox. I also respond to some important objections to this view. (shrink)

En este trabajo propongo una definición pragmática de la falacia de petición de principio. En la primera parte considero y rechazo la sugerencia de Frank Jackson de que la argumentación posee otro fin además del de convencer racionalmente a nuestro interlocutor de que algo es el caso. En la segunda parte ofrezco la definición. En la tercera parte hablo brevemente acerca de la representación de argumentos por medio de grafos. Finalmente, en la cuarta parte aplico la definición propuesta a algunos (...) ejemplos de argumentos.---“A Pragmatic Definition of the Begging the Question Fallacy”. A pragmatic definition of the Begging the question fallacy is presented in this paper. In the first part of it I consider and reject Frank Jackson’s suggestion according to which argumentation possesses a different end than rationally persuading an audience that something is the case. The definition is presented in part II. Part III refers briefly to the representation of arguments through graphs. Finally, in part IV, the proposed definition is applied to some argument examples. (shrink)