Abstract
Anti-reductionism in the epistemology of testimony is the thesis that testimonial knowledge is not reducible to knowledge of some other familiar kind, such as inductive knowledge. Interest relativism about knowledge attributions is the thesis that the standards for knowledge attributions are relative to practical contexts. This paper argues that anti-reductionism implies interest relativism. The notion of “implies” here is a fairly strong one: anti-reductionism, together with plausible assumptions, entails interest relativism. A second thesis of the paper is that anti-reductionism in the epistemology of testimony creates significant pressure toward attributor contextualism (a version of interest relativism). Even if anti-reductionism does not strictly entail attributor contextualism, the most powerful motivations for anti-reductionism also motivate attributor contextualism over alternative positions.
Reference20 articles.
1. COADY, C. A. J. Testimony: A Philosophical Study. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1992.
2. COHEN, Stewart. Contextualist Solutions to Epistemological Problems: Scepticism, Gettier, and the Lottery. Australasian Journal of Philosophy, [S. I.], v. 76, p. 289- 306, 1997.
3. COHEN, Stewart. Knowledge, Context, and Social Standards. Synthese, [S. I. ], n. 73, p. 3-26, 1987:
4. DEROSE, Keith. The Case for Contextualism, Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2009.
5. DEROSE, Keith. Solving the Skeptical Problem. The Philosophical Review, [S. I.], n. 104, p. 1-52, 1995.