Scepticism and absurdity

Inquiry 7 (1-4):163-190 (1964)
Analytic rejections of extreme traditional views, especially scepticism, as ?absurd? in some sense of violating ?rules? of discourse, arc considered. References to linguistic and pragmatic rules are discussed and found inadequate as bases for rejecting scepticism. References to logical principles alone are found to lead into scepticism. The claim that epistemology and scepticism take for granted an inadequate theory of words like ?know?, or ?knowledge?, as descriptive predicates, is considered. Alternatives, construing such words as appraisive or performative, are discussed, but are not found to provide any real escape from the traditional epistemological issues, or from scepticism
Keywords No keywords specified (fix it)
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: 12,997
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
J. L. Austin (1946). Other minds, part II. Proceedings of the Aristotelian Society 148:148-187.
Stuart Hampshire (1983). Thought and Action. University of Notre Dame Press.
David Pears & P. F. Strawson (1961). Individuals. Philosophical Quarterly 11 (44):262.
Citations of this work BETA

No citations found.

Similar books and articles

Monthly downloads

Added to index


Total downloads

15 ( #122,654 of 1,410,065 )

Recent downloads (6 months)

5 ( #46,237 of 1,410,065 )

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.