Switch to: References

Add citations

You must login to add citations.
  1. Trust Responsibly: Non-Evidential Virtue Epistemology.Jakob Ohlhorst - 2023 - New York City: Routledge.
    This book offers a defence of Wrightean epistemic entitlement, one of the most prominent approaches to hinge epistemology. It also systematically explores the connections between virtue epistemology and hinge epistemology. -/- According to hinge epistemology, any human belief set is built within and upon a framework of pre-evidential propositions – hinges – that cannot be justified. Epistemic entitlement argues that we are entitled to trust our hinges. But there remains a problem. Entitlement is inherently unconstrained and arbitrary: We can be (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  • Some concerns about the idea of basic moral certainty: A critical response to Samuel Laves.Jordi Fairhurst - 2023 - Philosophical Investigations 47 (1):119-136.
    Pleasants has developed the idea of basic moral certainties. Analogous to Wittgenstein's basic empirical certainties, they are best described as universal moral certainties which are natural and nonpropositional, and show unreflectively in the way we act. A clear-cut example is the wrongness of killing innocent human beings. Philosophers have levelled three damaging criticisms against Pleasants' proposal by (i) offering counterexamples to his proposed example of moral certainty, (ii) highlighting some disanalogies between moral certainties and Wittgenstein's basic empirical certainties and, lastly, (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   1 citation  
  • (1 other version)Relativism.Maria Baghramian & Adam J. Carter - 2020 - Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy.
    Relativism has been, in its various guises, both one of the most popular and most reviled philosophical doctrines of our time. Defenders see it as a harbinger of tolerance and the only ethical and epistemic stance worthy of the open-minded and tolerant. Detractors dismiss it for its alleged incoherence and uncritical intellectual permissiveness. Debates about relativism permeate the whole spectrum of philosophical sub-disciplines. From ethics to epistemology, science to religion, political theory to ontology, theories of meaning and even logic, philosophy (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   35 citations  
  • (1 other version)Relativism.Maria Baghramian & J. Adam Carter - 2015 - Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy:1-60.
    Relativism, roughly put, is the view that truth and falsity, right and wrong, standards of reasoning, and procedures of justification are products of differing conventions and frameworks of assessment and that their authority is confined to the context giving rise to them. More precisely, ‘relativism’ covers views which maintain that—at a level of high abstraction—at least some class of things have properties they have not simpliciter, but only relative to a given framework of assessment, and correspondingly, that the truth of (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   62 citations  
  • Epistemic austerity: limits to entitlement.Jakob Ohlhorst - 2021 - Synthese 199 (5-6):13771-13787.
    Epistemic entitlement is a species of internalist warrant that can be had without any evidential support. Unfortunately, for this kind of warrant the so-called problem of demarcation arises, a form of epistemic relativism. I first present entitlement theory and examine what the problem of demarcation is exactly, rejecting that it is either based on bizarreness or disagreement in favour of the thesis that the problem of demarcation is based on epistemic arbitrariness. Second, I argue that arbitrariness generates a problem for (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   2 citations  
  • Relativism.Chris Swoyer - 2008 - Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy.
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   28 citations  
  • Equal Validity or Nonneutrality? A defense of relativism1.Eduardo Pérez-Navarro - 2022 - Analysis 82 (3):492-498.
    The purpose of Baghramian and Coliva’s book is twofold. On the one hand, it aims at identifying a consistent set of commitments shared by all theories that have.
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   2 citations  
  • Relativism, Fallibilism, and the Need for Interpretive Charity.Nadine Elzein - 2022 - Royal Institute of Philosophy Supplement 92:253-270.
    Abstract‘Relativists' and ‘absolutists' about truth often see their own camp as promoting virtues, such as open-mindedness and intellectual humility, and see the opposing camp as fostering vices, like closed-mindedness and arrogance. Relativism is accused of fostering these vices because it entails that each person’s beliefs are automatically right for the person who holds them. How can we be humble or open-minded if we cannot concede that we might be wrong? Absolutism is accused of fostering these vices because the view is (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  • Against Human Rights Skeptics.Tomáš Sobek - 2023 - Ratio Juris 36 (4):314-332.
    The main goal of my text is to generalize Alexy's explicative argument against human rights skeptics in order to minimize the overall room for their escape. This argument tries to show that any attempt to intersubjectively justify the nonexistence of human rights as moral rights necessarily commits the so‐called performative self‐contradiction. Alexy worries that the effect of his argument can be weakened by a group reduction of discourse. But I will argue that this worry is overstated because the price of (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  • The way things go: moral relativism and suspension of judgment.Eduardo Pérez-Navarro - 2021 - Philosophical Studies 179 (1):49-64.
    A popular accusation against moral relativism is that it goes too far in its vindication of tolerance. The idea behind accusations like this can be summarized in the slogan, frequently attributed to relativism, that “anything goes”. The aim of this paper is to defend moral relativism from the accusation that it is an “anything goes” view; from the accusation that it forces us to suspend our judgment in cases in which we do not think we should even be allowed to. (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   5 citations