Titlebook: Contextualism, Factivity and Closure; A Union That Should Stefano Leardi,Nicla Vassallo Book 2018 The Author(s), under exclusive license t

Magnanimous

書(shū)目名稱(chēng)Contextualism, Factivity and Closure影響因子(影響力)




書(shū)目名稱(chēng)Contextualism, Factivity and Closure影響因子(影響力)學(xué)科排名




書(shū)目名稱(chēng)Contextualism, Factivity and Closure網(wǎng)絡(luò)公開(kāi)度




書(shū)目名稱(chēng)Contextualism, Factivity and Closure網(wǎng)絡(luò)公開(kāi)度學(xué)科排名




書(shū)目名稱(chēng)Contextualism, Factivity and Closure被引頻次




書(shū)目名稱(chēng)Contextualism, Factivity and Closure被引頻次學(xué)科排名




書(shū)目名稱(chēng)Contextualism, Factivity and Closure年度引用




書(shū)目名稱(chēng)Contextualism, Factivity and Closure年度引用學(xué)科排名




書(shū)目名稱(chēng)Contextualism, Factivity and Closure讀者反饋




書(shū)目名稱(chēng)Contextualism, Factivity and Closure讀者反饋學(xué)科排名

TRACE

The Commitment Towards (,) and (,),y, one might allege that the contextualists are not committed neither to the truth of any specific knowledge ascription like (.), “Oliver knows. that .”, nor to the claim that such a knowledge ascription is not knowable according to certain epistemic standards. In this chapter we will see two employ

COW

Asymmetrical Knowledge Ascriptions,io knows. that Oliver knows. that .”, holds. Here we will scrutinize two different solutions that propose to reconsider the role of this kind of ascriptions. The first is due to Brueckner and Buford and maintains that asymmetrical knowledge ascriptions should be refuted; the contextualists would not

absorbed

The Fluid View,oblem: the anti-sceptical argument of the theory, in fact, turns out to be unknowable and unassertable. In this chapter we will analyse a solution to the above-mentioned statability problem that consists of denying the fluid view—the thesis that the mere mention of an error possibility is enough to

Assemble

有罪

Epilogue,minimalistic contextualism (chapter three), moderate contextualism (chapter four and five) and bold contextualism (chapter six). Here we will provide a brief outline of the virtues and the vices of each reading of contextualism and we will claim that the moderate one is the version of the view that

有罪

The Commitment Towards (,) and (,),if Dinges’ strategy fails since it cannot avoid the commitment towards (.)-like propositions, that proposed by Freitag is successful in solving the conundrum, but achieves this result by means of a serious weakening of contextualism.

割公牛膨脹

Asymmetrical Knowledge Ascriptions, from the contextualists’ point of view, a proposition like (.) is not true, and that this conclusion entails some statability limitations for the theory. In Sect.?. we will see that the statability limitations cannot be overcome by allowing only certain sceptical arguments in the sceptical context.

DAUNT

outset

2211-4548 inges, Anthony Brueckner and Christopher Buford, Michael Ashfield, Martin Montminy and Wes Skolits, and Peter Baumann. Stefano Leardi and Nicla Vassallo highlight the similarities and commonalities, identifying978-3-030-16154-5978-3-030-16155-2Series ISSN 2211-4548 Series E-ISSN 2211-4556