Wrongful ways to raise the epistemic standard

[thumbnail of Wrongful ways to raise the epistemic standard unendnoted.pdf]
Preview
Text - Accepted Version
· Please see our End User Agreement before downloading.
| Preview

Please see our End User Agreement.

It is advisable to refer to the publisher's version if you intend to cite from this work. See Guidance on citing.

Add to AnyAdd to TwitterAdd to FacebookAdd to LinkedinAdd to PinterestAdd to Email

Grindrod, J. orcid id iconORCID: https://orcid.org/0000-0001-8684-974X (2022) Wrongful ways to raise the epistemic standard. Episteme, 19 (3). pp. 455-469. ISSN 1750-0117 doi: 10.1017/epi.2020.39

Abstract/Summary

This paper is concerned with identifying and accounting for cases where the epistemic standard is raised inappropriately. The first section is concerned with identifying a notion of a variable epistemic standard that is neutral regarding a range of theoretical issues. The second section draws upon Evelyn Brister’s work on contextualism and scepticism as well as more recent work on conceptual engineering to argue that the possibility that our knowledge discourse could be manipulated by nefarious actors warrants further investigation. The third section outlines and provides a partial explanation of such a case: one in which a climate change denier attempts to raise the epistemic standard in order to shut down inquiry.

Altmetric Badge

Item Type Article
URI https://reading-clone.eprints-hosting.org/id/eprint/99718
Identification Number/DOI 10.1017/epi.2020.39
Refereed Yes
Divisions Arts, Humanities and Social Science > School of Humanities > Philosophy
Publisher Cambridge University Press
Download/View statistics View download statistics for this item

Downloads

Downloads per month over past year

University Staff: Request a correction | Centaur Editors: Update this record

Search Google Scholar