The paper describes the sceptic as always asking for one more argument. First, I discuss an unstable internalist position against the sceptic, Crispin Wright's, and then propose a different frame to deal with the sceptic. The sceptic main target is the dogmatist, then she herself can be asked not to be dogmatic. But the sceptic is not stating anything, she is rather asking her opponent to back any claim he makes. If we reconstruct the exchange between the sceptic and her opponent as a question-answer exchange, in which she is puttting questions, and hence not making any claim, and her opponent is making claims, we can characterize as dogmatic the one who repeats oneself. The sceptic is dogmatic if she puts again the same question she has put before, and her opponent is if he replies with the same statement he has already replied a previous question. And we can also at each time tell who has the lead between the sceptic and her opponent, by ackonoledging who has been the last to put a question or give a reply that is not repeatful.

One More Argument / P. Leonardi. - STAMPA. - (2005), pp. 99-114. (Intervento presentato al convegno Congnition and Content tenutosi a Lisboa nel 27.3.2004).

One More Argument

LEONARDI, PAOLO
2005

Abstract

The paper describes the sceptic as always asking for one more argument. First, I discuss an unstable internalist position against the sceptic, Crispin Wright's, and then propose a different frame to deal with the sceptic. The sceptic main target is the dogmatist, then she herself can be asked not to be dogmatic. But the sceptic is not stating anything, she is rather asking her opponent to back any claim he makes. If we reconstruct the exchange between the sceptic and her opponent as a question-answer exchange, in which she is puttting questions, and hence not making any claim, and her opponent is making claims, we can characterize as dogmatic the one who repeats oneself. The sceptic is dogmatic if she puts again the same question she has put before, and her opponent is if he replies with the same statement he has already replied a previous question. And we can also at each time tell who has the lead between the sceptic and her opponent, by ackonoledging who has been the last to put a question or give a reply that is not repeatful.
2005
Cognition and Content
99
114
One More Argument / P. Leonardi. - STAMPA. - (2005), pp. 99-114. (Intervento presentato al convegno Congnition and Content tenutosi a Lisboa nel 27.3.2004).
P. Leonardi
File in questo prodotto:
Eventuali allegati, non sono esposti

I documenti in IRIS sono protetti da copyright e tutti i diritti sono riservati, salvo diversa indicazione.

Utilizza questo identificativo per citare o creare un link a questo documento: https://hdl.handle.net/11585/25598
 Attenzione

Attenzione! I dati visualizzati non sono stati sottoposti a validazione da parte dell'ateneo

Citazioni
  • ???jsp.display-item.citation.pmc??? ND
  • Scopus ND
  • ???jsp.display-item.citation.isi??? ND
social impact