Science, assertion, and the common ground

Synthese 200 (1):1-19 (2022)
  Copy   BIBTEX

Abstract

I argue that the appropriateness of an assertion is sensitive to context—or, really, the “common ground”—in a way that hasn’t previously been emphasized by philosophers. This kind of context-sensitivity explains why some scientific conclusions seem to be appropriately asserted even though they are not known, believed, or justified on the available evidence. I then consider other recent attempts to account for this phenomenon and argue that if they are to be successful, they need to recognize the kind of context-sensitivity that I argue for.

Analytics

Added to PP
2022-02-23

Downloads
597 (#2,542)

6 months
107 (#161,258)

Historical graph of downloads
How can I increase my downloads?

Author's Profile

Corey Dethier
University of Minnesota

Citations of this work

No Hope for Conciliationism.Jonathan Dixon - 2024 - Synthese 203 (148):1-30.
Diagnosing errors in climate model intercomparisons.Ryan O’Loughlin - 2023 - European Journal for Philosophy of Science 13 (2):1-29.
Calibrating statistical tools: Improving the measure of Humanity's influence on the climate.Corey Dethier - 2022 - Studies in History and Philosophy of Science Part A 94 (C):158-166.
The Belief Norm of Academic Publishing.Wesley Buckwalter - 2022 - Ergo: An Open Access Journal of Philosophy 9.

Add more citations

References found in this work

Knowledge and its limits.Timothy Williamson - 2000 - New York: Oxford University Press.
The wrongs of racist beliefs.Rima Basu - 2018 - Philosophical Studies 176 (9):2497-2515.
Knowledge and Its Limits.Timothy Williamson - 2000 - Philosophy 76 (297):460-464.
Doxastic Wronging.Rima Basu & Mark Schroeder - 2019 - In Brian Kim & Matthew McGrath (eds.), Pragmatic Encroachment in Epistemology. New York: Routledge. pp. 181-205.
Knowledge and its Limits.Timothy Williamson - 2000 - Tijdschrift Voor Filosofie 64 (1):200-201.

View all 70 references / Add more references