Graduate studies at Western
Philosophy 77 (4):615-624 (2002)
|Abstract||The winning entry in David Stove's Competition to Find the Worst Argument in the World was: “We can know things only as they are related to us/insofar as they fall under our conceptual schemes, etc., so, we cannot know things as they are in themselves.” That argument underpins many recent relativisms, including postmodernism, post-Kuhnian sociological philosophy of science, cultural relativism, sociobiological versions of ethical relativism, and so on. All such arguments have the same form as ‘We have eyes, therefore we cannot see’, and are equally invalid.|
|Keywords||No keywords specified (fix it)|
|Categories||categorize this paper)|
|Through your library||Configure|
Similar books and articles
Brian Kierland & Philip Swenson (2013). Ability-Based Objections to No-Best-World Arguments. Philosophical Studies 164 (3):669-683.
Kieran Setiya (2004). Transcendental Idealism in the 'Aesthetic'. Philosophy and Phenomenological Research 68 (1):63–88.
D. C. Stove (1998/2001). Scientific Irrationalism: Origins of a Postmodern Cult. Transaction Publishers.
Jenny Teichman (2001). The Intellectual Capacity of David Stove. Philosophy 76 (1):149-157.
Agustín Vicente (2004). The Overdetermination Argument Revisited. Minds and Machines 14 (3):331-47.
Howard Sankey (2012). Scepticism, Relativism and the Argument From the Criterion. Studies in History and Philosophy of Science Part A 43 (1):182-190.
Michael Rowan (1993). Stove on the Rationality of Induction and the Uniformity Thesis. British Journal for the Philosophy of Science 44 (3):561-566.
Andrew Pickin (2006). An Argument By Stove Against Inductive Scepticism. Dissertation, University of Cambridge
Added to index2009-01-28
Total downloads77 ( #12,872 of 740,856 )
Recent downloads (6 months)4 ( #20,739 of 740,856 )
How can I increase my downloads?