David Bourget (Western Ontario)
David Chalmers (ANU, NYU)
Rafael De Clercq
Jack Alan Reynolds
Learn more about PhilPapers
Synthese 155 (1):99 - 125 (2007)
Contextualism, in its standard form, is the view that the truth conditions of sentences of the form ‘S knows that P’ vary according to the context in which they are uttered. One possible objection to contextualism appeals to what Keith DeRose calls a warranted assertability maneuver (or WAM), according to which it is not our knowledge sentences themselves that have context-sensitive truth conditions, but what is pragmatically conveyed by the use of such sentences. Thus, proponents of WAMs argue, the context sensitivity of knowledge attributions is not a semantic phenomenon but a pragmatic one. I examine a number of WAMs and show that each (i) is seriously flawed, or (ii) undercuts standard contextualism if we hold a minimalist conception of semantic content. I propose an alternative form of contextualism that accommodates minimalism and is immune to the second type of WAM, and show that this new form of contextualism shares the virtues of standard contextualism.
|Keywords||Philosophy Philosophy Epistemology Logic Metaphysics Philosophy of Language|
|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
Kent Bach (1994). Conversational Impliciture. Mind and Language 9 (2):124-162.
Kent Bach (1987). Thought and Reference. Oxford University Press.
Kent Bach (1999). The Myth of Conventional Implicature. Linguistics and Philosophy 22 (4):327-366.
Kent Bach (1999). The Semantics Pragmatics Distinction: What It is and Why It Matters. In K. Turner (ed.), The Semantics-Pragmatics Interface From Different Points of View. Elsevier 65--84.
Kent Bach (2001). You Don't Say? Synthese 128 (1-2):15--44.
Citations of this work BETA
Jay Newhard (2012). The Argument From Skepticism for Contextualism. Philosophia 40 (3):563-575.
Matt Lutz (2013). The Pragmatics of Pragmatic Encroachment. Synthese 191 (8):1-24.
Geoff Pynn (2015). Pragmatic Contextualism. Metaphilosophy 46 (1):26-51.
Similar books and articles
Sarah Wright (2010). Virtues, Social Roles, and Contextualism. Metaphilosophy 41 (1):95-114.
Jessica Brown (2006). Contextualism and Warranted Assertibility Manoeuvres. Philosophical Studies 130 (3):407 - 435.
Tim Black & Peter Murphy (2005). Avoiding the Dogmatic Commitments of Contextualism. Grazer Philosophische Studien 69 (1):165-182.
Robin McKenna (2011). Interests Contextualism. Philosophia 39 (4):741-750.
John MacFarlane (2007). Semantic Minimalism and Nonindexical Contextualism. In Gerhard Preyer & Georg Peter (eds.), Context-Sensitivity and Semantic Minimalism: New Essays on Semantics and Pragmatics. Oxford University Press 240--250.
Frank Hofmann (2004). Why Epistemic Contextualism Does Not Provide an Adequate Account of Knowledge: Comments on Barke. Erkenntnis 61 (2-3):375 - 382.
Peter Baumann (2011). WAMs: Why Worry? Philosophical Papers 40 (2):155 - 177.
Wayne A. Davis (2004). Are Knowledge Claims Indexical? Erkenntnis 61 (2-3):257 - 281.
Martijn Blaauw (2003). WAMming Away at Contextualism. SATS: Northern European Journal of Philosophy 4 (1):88-97.
Added to index2009-01-28
Total downloads65 ( #35,579 of 1,699,829 )
Recent downloads (6 months)7 ( #88,892 of 1,699,829 )
How can I increase my downloads?