concept

Contextualism

Facts (16)

Sources

Epistemology - Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy plato.stanford.edu Matthias Steup, Ram Neta · Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy Dec 14, 2005 13 facts

claimContextualism posits that the word 'know' is context-sensitive, meaning its meaning and the standards required to possess knowledge vary depending on the situation or context.

claimAccording to contextualism, the closure principle remains true regardless of whether the meaning of 'know' is fixed by high or low standards.

claimContextualism is a philosophical position intended as a closure-preserving response to skepticism, specifically regarding the Brain in a Vat (BIV) argument.

claimContextualists resolve the paradox of the Brain in a Vat (BIV) argument by asserting that in low-standard contexts, the first premise and the conclusion of the BIV argument are false because we meet low standards of knowledge, whereas in high-standard contexts, the first premise and the conclusion are true because our epistemic position is not strong enough to meet high standards.

claimContextualism resolves the conflict with the Moorean response to the Brain in a Vat (BIV) argument by asserting that the first premise of the BIV argument is false only in low-standards contexts, while it is true in high-standards contexts.

claimAccording to contextualists, the salience of error-possibilities is the factor that changes the meaning of the word 'know' and shifts the standards of knowledge.

claimContextualism and the ambiguity response differ in that contextualism makes the rejection or endorsement of the Brain in a Vat (BIV) argument conclusion dependent on the speaker's context, whereas the ambiguity response makes context irrelevant by allowing for disambiguation in any context.

claimContextualism is not vulnerable to the replacement objection because it posits that context determines which proposition—infallible or fallible knowledge—the conclusion of the Brain in a Vat (BIV) argument expresses.

claimThe 'semantic ascent' element of contextualism posits that a satisfactory response to skepticism and the Brain in a Vat (BIV) argument requires distinguishing between high-standards and low-standards meanings of 'knowledge'.

claimThe 'replacement objection' against contextualism argues that contextualism incorrectly replaces an interest in knowledge itself with a focus on the word 'know'.

claimBoth contextualism and the ambiguity response share the 'semantic ascent' element, which requires distinguishing between various meanings of the word 'know' to provide a satisfactory response to skepticism.

claimContextualists assert that relative to the standards of knowledge operational in low-standards contexts, an individual can know that they are not a Brain in a Vat.

claimContextualists in epistemology distinguish between two sets of standards for knowledge, referred to as 'high' and 'low' standards, which determine how liberally or reluctantly knowledge is ascribed in different contexts.

Virtue Epistemology - Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy plato.stanford.edu John Greco, John Turri · Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy Jul 9, 1999 2 facts

claimContextualism is a view in epistemology that asserts the truth conditions for knowledge attributions like "S knows that P" are context-sensitive due to the nature of the verb "know."

referenceMark Heller discussed the role of contextualism within anti-luck epistemology in a 1999 article.

Epistemological Problems of Testimony plato.stanford.edu Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy Apr 1, 2021 1 fact

claimAlani Golanski argued in 2001 that legal scholars misunderstand the Daubert standard for expert testimony because they fail to account for the contextualist nature of law's epistemology.