David Bourget (Western Ontario)
David Chalmers (ANU, NYU)
Rafael De Clercq
Jack Alan Reynolds
Learn more about PhilPapers
Philosophical Studies 119 (1-2):1-21 (2004)
What happens to the "conversational score" when speakers in a conversation push the score for a context-sensitive term in different directions? In epistemology, contextualists are often construed as holding that both the skeptic ("You don't know!") and her opponent ("Oh, yes I do!") speak truthfully when they debate. This assumes a "multiple scoreboards" version of contextualism. But contextualists themselves typically opt for "single scoreboard" views on which such apparently competing claims really do conflict. This paper explores several single scoreboard options for contextualists, opting in the end for the "gap view," on which neither of our debaters speaks truthfully.
|Keywords||Philosophy Philosophy Epistemology Logic Philosophy of Mind Philosophy of Religion|
|Categories||categorize this paper)|
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
No references found.
Citations of this work BETA
James Beebe (2010). Moral Relativism in Context. Noûs 44 (4):691-724.
John MacFarlane (2007). Relativism and Disagreement. Philosophical Studies 132 (1):17-31.
Jennifer Nagel (2008). Knowledge Ascriptions and the Psychological Consequences of Changing Stakes. Australasian Journal of Philosophy 86 (2):279-294.
Carl Baker (2012). Indexical Contextualism and the Challenges From Disagreement. Philosophical Studies 157 (1):107-123.
Jessica Brown (2006). Contextualism and Warranted Assertibility Manoeuvres. Philosophical Studies 130 (3):407 - 435.
Similar books and articles
Dan Zeman (2010). Knowledge Attributions and Relevant Epistemic Standards. In Recanati François, Stojanovic Isidora & Villanueva Neftali (eds.), Context Dependence, Perpsective and Relativity. Mouton de Gruyter.
Verena Gottschling (2004). Keeping the Conversational Score: Constraints for an Optimal Contextualist Answer? [REVIEW] Erkenntnis 61 (2-3):295 - 314.
Nat Hansen (2011). Color Adjectives and Radical Contextualism. Linguistics and Philosophy 34 (3):201-221.
Elke Brendel (2005). Why Contextualists Cannot Know They Are Right: Self-Refuting Implications of Contextualism. [REVIEW] Acta Analytica 20 (2):38-55.
Theodore E. D. Braun (1998). Diderot, the Ghost of Bayle, Atheists, and the Morality Scoreboard. Diderot Studies 27:45 - 55.
Martin Montminy (2008). Can Contextualists Maintain Neutrality? Philosophers' Imprint 8 (7):1-13.
Keith DeRose (2004). The Problem with Subject-Sensitive Invariantism. Philosophy and Phenomenological Research 68 (2):346–350.
Richard Feldman (2004). Comments on DeRose's “Single Scoreboard Semantics”. Philosophical Studies 119 (1-2):23-33.
Added to index2009-01-28
Total downloads112 ( #14,281 of 1,696,181 )
Recent downloads (6 months)31 ( #11,027 of 1,696,181 )
How can I increase my downloads?