Wybrane odpowiedzi na argument sceptyczny
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.18778/1689-4286.44.07Słowa kluczowe:
argument sceptyczny, kontekstualizm, teza o pociąganiu, zasada domknięcia, relewantne alternatywyAbstrakt
The aim of this paper is to present various answers to the skeptical argument and propose an alternative solution. Suggested solution refers to the results of empirical research which lead to abandonment of entailment thesis concerning knowledge. My answer is contextualist inasmuch as it recognizes the existence of different concepts of knowledge. The applicability of these concepts depends on the situation; in a skeptical context the concept of knowledge is not accompanied by appropriate belief, and in ordinary contexts knowledge requires a belief of specific content.
Bibliografia
Buckwalter W., Rose D., Turri J. (2013). Belief through Thick and Thin. Nous, Vol. 49, No. 4, 1-28,
Zobacz w Google Scholar
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/nous.12048
Cohen S. (2008), Ascriber Contextualism. W. Greco J. (red.), The Oxford Handbook of Skepticism (415-434). Oxford University Press
Zobacz w Google Scholar
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/oxfordhb/9780195183214.003.0020
DeRose K. (1999), Introduction: Responding to Skepticism. W: DeRose K., Warfield T. A. (red.), Skepticism. A Contemporary Reader (1-22). Oxford University Press, New-York Oxford
Zobacz w Google Scholar
DeRose K. (1999), Solving the Skeptical Problem. W: DeRose K., Warfield T. A. (red.), Skepticism. A Contemporary Reader (183-219). Oxford University Press, New-York Oxford
Zobacz w Google Scholar
Dretske F. (1999), Epistemic Operators. W: DeRose K., Warfield T. A. (red.), Skepticism. A Contemporary Reader (131-144). Oxford University Press, New-York Oxford
Zobacz w Google Scholar
Forbes G. (1999), Realism and Skepticism: Brains in a Vat Revisited. W: DeRose K., Warfield T. A. (red.), Skepticism. A Contemporary Reader (61-75). Oxford University Press, New-York Oxford
Zobacz w Google Scholar
Lemos N. (2008), Moore and Skepticism. W: Greco J. (red.), The Oxford Handbook of Skepticism (330-345). Oxford University Press
Zobacz w Google Scholar
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/oxfordhb/9780195183214.003.0016
Lewis D. (1999), Elusive Knowledge. W: DeRose K., Warfield T. A. (red.), Skepticism. A Contemporary Reader (220-239). Oxford University Press, New-York Oxford
Zobacz w Google Scholar
Myers-Schulz B., Schwitzgebel E. (2013). Knowing that p without believing that p. Nous, Vol. 47, No. 2, 371-384
Zobacz w Google Scholar
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/nous.12022
Nozick R. (1999), Philosophical Explanations. W: DeRose K., Warfield T. A. (red.), Skepticism. A Contemporary Reader (156-179) Oxford University Press, New-York Oxford
Zobacz w Google Scholar
Pritchard D. (2008), Sensitivity, Safety and Antiluck Epistemology. W: Greco J. (red.), The Oxford Handbook of Skepticism (437-455). Oxford University Press
Zobacz w Google Scholar
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/oxfordhb/9780195183214.003.0021
Putnam H. (1999), Brains in a Vat. W: DeRose K., Warfield T. A. (red.), Skepticism. A Contemporary Reader (27-42). Oxford University Press, New-York Oxford
Zobacz w Google Scholar
Rose D., Schaffer J. (2013), Knowledge Entails Dispositional Belief. Philosophical Studies, 166, 19-50
Zobacz w Google Scholar
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11098-012-0052-z
Sosa E. (2000), Skepticism and Contextualism. Philosophical Issues, 10, 1-18
Zobacz w Google Scholar
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1758-2237.2000.tb00002.x
Stine G. (1999), Skepticism, Relevant Alternatives, and Deductive Closure. W: DeRose K., Warfield T. A. (red.), Skepticism. A Contemporary Reader (145-155). Oxford University Press, New-York Oxford
Zobacz w Google Scholar
Pobrania
Opublikowane
Jak cytować
Numer
Dział
Licencja
Utwór dostępny jest na licencji Creative Commons Uznanie autorstwa – Użycie niekomercyjne – Bez utworów zależnych 4.0 Międzynarodowe.
