File Download

There are no files associated with this item.

  Links for fulltext
     (May Require Subscription)
Supplementary

Book Chapter: Who Wants to Know?

TitleWho Wants to Know?
Authors
Keywordsepistemic supererogation
metaphilosophy
epistemic normativity
epistemic pluralism
contextualism
Issue Date2019
PublisherOxford University Press
Citation
Who Wants to Know?. In Gendler, TZ & Hawthorne, J (Eds.), Oxford Studies in Epistemology, v. 6, p. 114-136. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press, 2019 How to Cite?
AbstractThis chapter argues that professional inquirers, including professional philosophers, are subject to special epistemic obligations which require them to meet higher standards than those that are required for knowing. Perhaps the most obvious examples come from the experimental sciences, where professionals are required to employ rigorous methodological procedures to reduce the risk of error and bias; procedures such as double-blinding are obligatory in many experimental contexts, but no parallel bias-reducing measures are generally expected in ordinary epistemic activity. To expect such would, in fact, be over-demanding. I argue that this variation in epistemic requirements cannot be accounted for adequately via the usual standard-shifting accounts of knowledge, such as contextualism or subject-sensitive invariantism. Instead, it calls for a more pluralistic approach—it suggests that knowledge is simply not the only epistemic state worthy of philosophical attention.
DescriptionChapter 5
Persistent Identifierhttp://hdl.handle.net/10722/296349
ISBN

 

DC FieldValueLanguage
dc.contributor.authorNado, JE-
dc.date.accessioned2021-02-22T04:54:02Z-
dc.date.available2021-02-22T04:54:02Z-
dc.date.issued2019-
dc.identifier.citationWho Wants to Know?. In Gendler, TZ & Hawthorne, J (Eds.), Oxford Studies in Epistemology, v. 6, p. 114-136. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press, 2019-
dc.identifier.isbn9780198833314-
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/10722/296349-
dc.descriptionChapter 5-
dc.description.abstractThis chapter argues that professional inquirers, including professional philosophers, are subject to special epistemic obligations which require them to meet higher standards than those that are required for knowing. Perhaps the most obvious examples come from the experimental sciences, where professionals are required to employ rigorous methodological procedures to reduce the risk of error and bias; procedures such as double-blinding are obligatory in many experimental contexts, but no parallel bias-reducing measures are generally expected in ordinary epistemic activity. To expect such would, in fact, be over-demanding. I argue that this variation in epistemic requirements cannot be accounted for adequately via the usual standard-shifting accounts of knowledge, such as contextualism or subject-sensitive invariantism. Instead, it calls for a more pluralistic approach—it suggests that knowledge is simply not the only epistemic state worthy of philosophical attention.-
dc.languageeng-
dc.publisherOxford University Press-
dc.relation.ispartofOxford Studies in Epistemology-
dc.subjectepistemic supererogation-
dc.subjectmetaphilosophy-
dc.subjectepistemic normativity-
dc.subjectepistemic pluralism-
dc.subjectcontextualism-
dc.titleWho Wants to Know?-
dc.typeBook_Chapter-
dc.identifier.emailNado, JE: nado@hku.hk-
dc.identifier.authorityNado, JE=rp02287-
dc.identifier.doi10.1093/oso/9780198833314.003.0005-
dc.identifier.hkuros321390-
dc.identifier.volume6-
dc.identifier.spage114-
dc.identifier.epage136-
dc.publisher.placeOxford, UK-

Export via OAI-PMH Interface in XML Formats


OR


Export to Other Non-XML Formats