Contesting Pyrrhonian Contrastism

M.J. Blaauw

doi:10.1111/j.1467-9213.2008.557.x

Contesting Pyrrhonian Contrastism

M.J. Blaauw

Research in Theoretical Philosophy

Research output: Contribution to Journal › Article › Academic › peer-review

Abstract

I air three kinds of problem to which Sinnott-Armstrong's epistemological contrastivism seems to be exposed: (a) the theory gives an unplausible account of justification attributions; (b) the Pyrrhonism which results from its inability to identify relevant contrast classes bars us from epistemic responsibility; (c) contextualism does just as well as Pyrrhonism, despite Sinnott-Armstrong's arguments to the contrary. © 2008 The Author.

Original language	English
Pages (from-to)	471-478
Journal	Philosophical Quarterly
Volume	58
Issue number	232
DOIs	https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9213.2008.557.x
Publication status	Published - 2008

Access to Document

10.1111/j.1467-9213.2008.557.x

Persistent URL (handle)

Persistent link

Cite this

@article{dd4f386b6cae400ea20015c6db9b2d7d,

title = "Contesting Pyrrhonian Contrastism",

abstract = "I air three kinds of problem to which Sinnott-Armstrong's epistemological contrastivism seems to be exposed: (a) the theory gives an unplausible account of justification attributions; (b) the Pyrrhonism which results from its inability to identify relevant contrast classes bars us from epistemic responsibility; (c) contextualism does just as well as Pyrrhonism, despite Sinnott-Armstrong's arguments to the contrary. {\textcopyright} 2008 The Author.",

author = "M.J. Blaauw",

year = "2008",

doi = "10.1111/j.1467-9213.2008.557.x",

language = "English",

volume = "58",

pages = "471--478",

journal = "Philosophical Quarterly",

issn = "0031-8094",

publisher = "Oxford University Press",

number = "232",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Contesting Pyrrhonian Contrastism

AU - Blaauw, M.J.

PY - 2008

Y1 - 2008

N2 - I air three kinds of problem to which Sinnott-Armstrong's epistemological contrastivism seems to be exposed: (a) the theory gives an unplausible account of justification attributions; (b) the Pyrrhonism which results from its inability to identify relevant contrast classes bars us from epistemic responsibility; (c) contextualism does just as well as Pyrrhonism, despite Sinnott-Armstrong's arguments to the contrary. © 2008 The Author.

AB - I air three kinds of problem to which Sinnott-Armstrong's epistemological contrastivism seems to be exposed: (a) the theory gives an unplausible account of justification attributions; (b) the Pyrrhonism which results from its inability to identify relevant contrast classes bars us from epistemic responsibility; (c) contextualism does just as well as Pyrrhonism, despite Sinnott-Armstrong's arguments to the contrary. © 2008 The Author.

U2 - 10.1111/j.1467-9213.2008.557.x

DO - 10.1111/j.1467-9213.2008.557.x

M3 - Article

SN - 0031-8094

VL - 58

SP - 471

EP - 478

JO - Philosophical Quarterly

JF - Philosophical Quarterly

IS - 232

ER -

Contesting Pyrrhonian Contrastism

Abstract

Access to Document

Persistent URL (handle)

Fingerprint

Cite this