What Would a BIV Do Differently?

A Pragmatist Defense of Contextualist Fallibilism

Authors

  • Abtin Aminzadeh Dezfuli

Keywords:

Keith DeRose, epistemology, skeptical puzzle, David Lewis, fallibilism

Abstract

In “Solving the Skeptical Problem”, Keith DeRose offers a contextualist response to a possible formulation of the skeptical hypothesis about knowledge. I will here outline his position in order to demonstrate the potential in the contextualist approach to effectively solve the skeptical puzzle. I will, however, go on to argue that the contextualist response as formulated by DeRose falls short of achieving its persistently elusive goal. In this, I will follow David Lewis, in “Elusive Knowledge”, in order to explain how the type of contextualist solution offered by DeRose is inherently self-defeating. I will then suggest the introduction of a pragmatist understanding of knowledge into the contextualist picture. Shifting towards fallibilism, I will argue that in light of pragmatist considerations, the skeptical puzzle loses much, if not all, of its threatening significance.

Downloads

Published

2021-09-07

How to Cite

Aminzadeh Dezfuli, A. (2021). What Would a BIV Do Differently? A Pragmatist Defense of Contextualist Fallibilism . The Oracle, (1), 23–30. Retrieved from https://oracle.journals.yorku.ca/index.php/default/article/view/51

Issue

Section

Articles