The Case against Epistemic Relativism: Reflections on Chapter 6 of F ear of Knowledge

Abstract

According to one sort of epistemic relativist, normative epistemic claims (e.g., evidence E justifies hypothesis H) are never true or false simpliciter, but only relative to one or another epistemic system. In chapter 6 of Fear of Knowledge, Paul Boghossian objects to this view on the ground that its central notions cannot be explained, and that it cannot account for the normativity of epistemic discourse. This paper explores how the dogged relativist might respon

    Similar works

    Full text

    thumbnail-image

    Available Versions

    Last time updated on 10/12/2019
    Last time updated on 01/04/2019
    Last time updated on 03/12/2019
    Last time updated on 04/12/2019
    Last time updated on 03/12/2019
    Last time updated on 03/01/2020
    Last time updated on 20/12/2019
    Last time updated on 04/12/2019