151903-Thumbnail Image.png
Description
ABSTRACT In this work, I provide two novel pieces of evidence in favor of the view that there is pragmatic encroachment on knowledge. First, I present an empirical case via the results of a series of recent experiments to show

ABSTRACT In this work, I provide two novel pieces of evidence in favor of the view that there is pragmatic encroachment on knowledge. First, I present an empirical case via the results of a series of recent experiments to show that folk-knowledge attributions may be sensitive to time constraints even when the latter are construed in a non-truth relevant manner. Along the way, I consider some comments made by Jonathan Schaffer (2006) as it pertains to interpreting time constraints-sensitivity in a manner that supports contextualism, before offering reasons to resist such a treatment. I proceed by applying interest relative invariantism to adjudicate a conflict in the epistemology of testimony namely, the positive reasons requirement a la, reductionism vs. non-reductionism. In particular, I highlight how whether an epistemic subject H needs positive non-testimonial reasons to be justified in accepting S's testimony that p, depends on what is at stake for H in believing that p and how much time H has in deliberating about p.
Reuse Permissions


  • Download restricted.

    Details

    Title
    • Knowledge, time constraints, and pragmatic encroachment
    Contributors
    Date Created
    2013
    Resource Type
  • Text
  • Collections this item is in
    Note
    • thesis
      Partial requirement for: M.A., Arizona State University, 2013
    • bibliography
      Includes bibilographical references (p. 71-73)
    • Field of study: Philosophy

    Citation and reuse

    Statement of Responsibility

    by Joseph Ellis Shin

    Machine-readable links