David Bourget (Western Ontario)
David Chalmers (ANU, NYU)
Rafael De Clercq
Jack Alan Reynolds
Learn more about PhilPapers
Synthese 68 (2):225 - 259 (1986)
There are many contemporary sources and defenders of epistemological relativism which have not been considered thus far. I have, for example, barely touched on the voluminous literature regarding frameworks, conceptual schemes, and Wittgensteinian forms of life. Davidson's challenge to the scheme/content distinction and thereby to conceptual relativism, Rorty's acceptance of the Davidsonian argument and his use of it to defend a relativistic position, Winchian and other sociological and anthropological arguments for relativism, recent work in the sociology of science, and Goodman's novel articulation of a relativism of worlds and of worldmaking, to mention just some of the contemporary loci of debate, all need to be addressed. So also do the plethora of relativistic arguments spawned by Kuhn and related literature in recent philosophy of science. Therefore, it cannot be said that there is no more to be said on behalf of epistemological relativism. Moreover, the positive task of delineating a defensible version of absolutism remains to be accomplished.Nevertheless, the defenses of relativism considered above do seem to have been successfully undercut. More specifically, the arguments for the incoherence of relativism are as compelling as ever, and have manifestly not been laid to rest by contemporary relativists. The basic Socratic insight that relativism is self-refuting, and so incoherent, remains a fundamental difficulty for those who would resuscitate and defend the ancient Protagorean doctrine or a modern variant of it
|Keywords||No keywords specified (fix it)|
|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
John P. Portelli (1990). The Socratic Method and Philosophy for Children. Metaphilosophy 21 (1-2):141-161.
Harvey Siegel (1987). Rationality and Ideology. Educational Theory 37 (2):153-167.
Similar books and articles
Aaron Z. Zimmerman (2007). Against Relativism. [REVIEW] Philosophical Studies 133 (3):313-348.
Philip Hugly & Charles Sayward (1990). Moral Relativism and Deontic Logic. Synthese 85 (1):139 - 152.
James O. Young (2009). Relativism, Standards and Aesthetic Judgements. International Journal of Philosophical Studies 17 (2):221 – 231.
Philip Hugly & Charles Sayward (1987). Relativism and Ontology. Philosophical Quarterly 37 (148):278-290.
Sebastiano Moruzzi & Crispin Wright (2009). Trumping Assessments and the Aristotelian Future. Synthese 166 (2):309 - 331.
Steven D. Hales (ed.) (2011). A Companion to Relativism. Wiley-Blackwell.
Patrick Greenough (2011). Truth-Relativism, Norm-Relativism, and Assertion. In Brown J. & Cappelen H. (eds.), Assertion: New Philosophical Essays. Oxford University Press.
Mark Richard (2008). When Truth Gives Out. Oxford University Press.
Stefano Predelli & Isidora Stojanovic (2008). Semantic Relativism and the Logic of Indexicals. In Manuel García-Carpintero & Max Kölbel (eds.), Relative Truth. Oxford University Press. 63--90.
Harvey Siegel (2011). Relativism, Incoherence, and the Strong Programme. In Richard Schantz & Markus Seidel (eds.), The Problem of Relativism in the Sociology of (Scientific) Knowledge. ontos.
Added to index2009-01-28
Total downloads67 ( #20,627 of 1,096,804 )
Recent downloads (6 months)6 ( #40,273 of 1,096,804 )
How can I increase my downloads?