Knowledge claims and context: Loose use [Book Review]

Philosophical Studies 132 (3):395 - 438 (2007)
There is abundant evidence of contextual variation in the use of “S knows p.” Contextualist theories explain this variation in terms of semantic hypotheses that refer to standards of justification determined by “practical” features of either the subject’s context (Hawthorne & Stanley) or the ascriber’s context (Lewis, Cohen, & DeRose). There is extensive linguistic counterevidence to both forms. I maintain that the contextual variation of knowledge claims is better explained by common pragmatic factors. I show here that one is variable strictness. “S knows p” is commonly used loosely to implicate “S is close enough to knowing p for contextually indicated purposes.” A pragmatic account may use a range of semantics, even contextualist. I use an invariant semantics on which knowledge requires complete justification. This combination meets the Moorean constraint as well as any linguistic theory should, and meets the intuition constraint much better than contextualism. There is no need for ad hoc error theories. The variation in conditions of assertability and practical rationality is better explained by variably strict constraints. It will follow that “S knows p” is used loosely to implicate that the condition for asserting “p” and using it in practical reasoning are satisfied.
Keywords Contextualism  Knowledge  Pragmatics  Semantics  Indexicals  Skepticism  Justification  Loose use  Assertion  Practical reasoning
Categories (categorize this paper)
 Save to my reading list
Follow the author(s)
My bibliography
Export citation
Find it on Scholar
Edit this record
Mark as duplicate
Revision history Request removal from index
Download options
PhilPapers Archive

Upload a copy of this paper     Check publisher's policy on self-archival     Papers currently archived: 14,242
External links
Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server
Configure custom proxy (use this if your affiliation does not provide a proxy)
Through your library
References found in this work BETA
Jay David Atlas (1977). Negation, Ambiguity, and Presupposition. Linguistics and Philosophy 1 (3):321 - 336.
Kent Bach (1994). Conversational Impliciture. Mind and Language 9 (2):124-162.
Kent Bach (2005). The Emperor's New 'Knows'. In Gerhard Preyer & Georg Peter (eds.), Contextualism in Philosophy: Knowledge, Meaning, and Truth. Oxford University Press 51--89.

View all 56 references

Citations of this work BETA
Wayne A. Davis (2013). On Nonindexical Contextualism. Philosophical Studies 163 (2):561-574.
Keith Derose (2012). Replies to Nagel, Ludlow, and Fantl and McGrath. [REVIEW] Philosophy and Phenomenological Research 84 (3):703-721.
Peter Baumann (2011). WAMs: Why Worry? Philosophical Papers 40 (2):155 - 177.

View all 11 citations

Similar books and articles

Monthly downloads

Added to index


Total downloads

74 ( #29,398 of 1,699,807 )

Recent downloads (6 months)

6 ( #105,649 of 1,699,807 )

How can I increase my downloads?

My notes
Sign in to use this feature

Start a new thread
There  are no threads in this forum
Nothing in this forum yet.