A new maneuver against the epistemic relativist

5Citations
Citations of this article
9Readers
Mendeley users who have this article in their library.
Get full text

Abstract

Epistemic relativists often appeal to an epistemic incommensurability thesis. One notable example is the position advanced by Wittgenstein in On certainty (1969). However, Ian Hacking's radical denial of the possibility of objective epistemic reasons for belief poses, we suggest, an even more forceful challenge to mainstream meta-epistemology. Our central objective will be to develop a novel strategy for defusing Hacking's line of argument. Specifically, we show that the epistemic incommensurability thesis can be resisted even if we grant the very insights that lead Hacking to claim that epistemic reasons are always relative to a style of reasoning. Surprisingly, the key to defusing the argument is to be found in recent mainstream work on the epistemic state of objectual understanding. © 2013 Springer Science+Business Media Dordrecht.

Cite

CITATION STYLE

APA

Carter, J. A., & Gordon, E. C. (2014). A new maneuver against the epistemic relativist. Synthese, 191(8), 1683–1695. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11229-013-0357-2

Register to see more suggestions

Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.

Already have an account?

Save time finding and organizing research with Mendeley

Sign up for free