Abstract
Contextualists support their view by appeal to cases which show that whether an attribution of knowledge seems correct depends on attributor factors. Contextualists conclude that the truth-conditions of knowledge attributions depend on the attributor's context. Invariantists respond that these cases show only that the warranted assertability-conditions of knowledge attributions depend on the attributor's context. I examine DeRose's recent argument against the possibility of such an invariantist response, an argument which appeals to the knowledge account of assertion and the context-sensitivity of assertion. I argue that DeRose's new argument does not rule out either of the two forms of invariantism, classic and subject-sensitive invariantism. Further, I argue against DeRose that an invariantist can explain the context-sensitivity of assertion.
| Original language | English |
|---|---|
| Pages (from-to) | 263-285 |
| Number of pages | 23 |
| Journal | The Philosophical Quarterly |
| Volume | 55 |
| Issue number | 219 |
| DOIs | |
| Publication status | Published - Apr 2005 |
Keywords
- KNOWLEDGE
Fingerprint
Dive into the research topics of 'Adapt or Die: The Death of Invariantism?'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.Cite this
- APA
- Author
- BIBTEX
- Harvard
- Standard
- RIS
- Vancouver