Though many philosophers agree that stakes play a role in ordinary knowledge ascriptions, there is disagreement about what explains this. In this article, we disarm an important motivation for epistemic contextualism and interest‐relative invariantism. We accomplish this by presenting a stringent test of whether there is a stakes effect on ordinary knowledge ascription. Having shown that, even on a stringent way of testing, stakes fail to impact ordinary knowledge ascription, we will conclude that we should take another look at classical invariantism.

Nessuna posta in gioco nella conoscenza / Rose, David; Machery, Edouard; Stich, Stephen; Alai, Mario; Angelucci, Adrian; Berninas, Renatas; Buchtel, Emma E.; Chatterjee, Amita; Cheon, Hyundeuk; Cho, In-Rae; Cohnitz, Daniel; Cova, Florian; Dranseika, Vilius; Lagos, Angeles Eraña; Ghadakpour, Laleh; Grinberg, Maurice; Hannikainen, Ivar; Hashimoto, Takaaki; Horowitz, Amir; Hristova, Evgeniya; Jraissati, Yasmina; Kadreva, Veselina; Karasawa, Kaori; Hackjin, Kim; Kim, Yeonjeon; Lee, Min-Woo; Mauro, Carlos; Mizumoto, Masaharu; Moruzzi, Sebastiano; Olivola, Christopher; Ornelas, Jorge; Osimani, Barbara; Lopez, Alejandro Rosas; Romero, Carlos; Sangoi, Massimo; Sereni, Andrea; Songhorian, Sarah; Sousa, Paulo; Struchiner, Noel; Tripodi, Vera; Usui, Naoki; Mercado, Alejandro Vázquez del; Volpe, Giorgio; Vosgerichian, Hrag Abraham; Zhang, Xueyi; Zhu, Jing. - STAMPA. - (2024), pp. 185-209.

Nessuna posta in gioco nella conoscenza

Moruzzi, Sebastiano;Volpe, Giorgio;
2024

Abstract

Though many philosophers agree that stakes play a role in ordinary knowledge ascriptions, there is disagreement about what explains this. In this article, we disarm an important motivation for epistemic contextualism and interest‐relative invariantism. We accomplish this by presenting a stringent test of whether there is a stakes effect on ordinary knowledge ascription. Having shown that, even on a stringent way of testing, stakes fail to impact ordinary knowledge ascription, we will conclude that we should take another look at classical invariantism.
2024
Filosofia della conoscenza. Cosa sappiamo, come lo sappiamo
185
209
Nessuna posta in gioco nella conoscenza / Rose, David; Machery, Edouard; Stich, Stephen; Alai, Mario; Angelucci, Adrian; Berninas, Renatas; Buchtel, Emma E.; Chatterjee, Amita; Cheon, Hyundeuk; Cho, In-Rae; Cohnitz, Daniel; Cova, Florian; Dranseika, Vilius; Lagos, Angeles Eraña; Ghadakpour, Laleh; Grinberg, Maurice; Hannikainen, Ivar; Hashimoto, Takaaki; Horowitz, Amir; Hristova, Evgeniya; Jraissati, Yasmina; Kadreva, Veselina; Karasawa, Kaori; Hackjin, Kim; Kim, Yeonjeon; Lee, Min-Woo; Mauro, Carlos; Mizumoto, Masaharu; Moruzzi, Sebastiano; Olivola, Christopher; Ornelas, Jorge; Osimani, Barbara; Lopez, Alejandro Rosas; Romero, Carlos; Sangoi, Massimo; Sereni, Andrea; Songhorian, Sarah; Sousa, Paulo; Struchiner, Noel; Tripodi, Vera; Usui, Naoki; Mercado, Alejandro Vázquez del; Volpe, Giorgio; Vosgerichian, Hrag Abraham; Zhang, Xueyi; Zhu, Jing. - STAMPA. - (2024), pp. 185-209.
Rose, David; Machery, Edouard; Stich, Stephen; Alai, Mario; Angelucci, Adrian; Berninas, Renatas; Buchtel, Emma E.; Chatterjee, Amita; Cheon, Hyundeuk...espandi
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/11585/971759
 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