Analysis 72 (3):526-534 (2012)
Defence of conditions to withdraw an assertion that require evidence or epistemic reasons that the assertion is not true or warranted. (Adler, J. 2006. Withdrawal and contextualism. Analysis 66: 280–85) The defence replies to the claim that better methods justify withdrawal without meeting that requirement and without pragmatic encroachment.
|Keywords||No keywords specified (fix it)|
|Categories||categorize this paper)|
References found in this work BETA
Citations of this work BETA
No citations found.
Similar books and articles
Contextualism and Fallibility: Pragmatic Encroachment, Possibility, and Strength of Epistemic Position.Jonathan E. Adler - 2012 - Synthese 188 (2):247-272.
Pragmatic Encroachment: It's Not Just About Knowledge. McGrath & Jeremy Fantl - 2012 - Episteme 9 (1):27-42.
Pragmatic Encroachment and Belief-Desire Psychology.Jonathan Ichikawa, Benjamin Jarvis & Katherine Rubin - 2012 - Analytic Philosophy 53 (4):327-343.
Belief, Credence, and Pragmatic Encroachment1.Jacob Ross & Mark Schroeder - 2014 - Philosophy and Phenomenological Research 88 (2):259-288.
The Epistemic Value of Moral Considerations: Justification, Moral Encroachment, and James' 'Will To Believe'.Michael Pace - 2011 - Noûs 45 (2):239-268.
Rational Assertibility, the Steering Role of Knowledge, and Pragmatic Encroachment.Igal Kvart - manuscript
Contextualism on a Pragmatic, Not a Skeptical, Footing.Bruce Russell - 2005 - Acta Analytica 20 (2):26-37.
Pragmatic Encroachment, Stakes, and Religious Knowledge.Aaron Rizzieri - 2011 - International Journal for Philosophy of Religion 70 (3):217-229.
Contextualism and the Knowledge Norm of Assertion.Christoph Jäger - 2012 - Analysis 72 (3):491-498.
Added to index2012-06-08
Total downloads171 ( #26,945 of 2,172,801 )
Recent downloads (6 months)2 ( #172,512 of 2,172,801 )
How can I increase my downloads?