Contextualist semantics (DeRose, Lewis) entails that 'knows' picks out different relations in different contexts, so skeptical conclusions true in heightened-scrutiny contexts carry no normative weight for ordinary contexts.
?Rate how convincing each reason is below to see the overall strength.
No one has weighed in yet. Be the first to share reasons for or against this statement.
Sign in or register to share your perspective on this statement.
Everyday situations in normal life, as opposed to special philosophical thought experiments.
Relations
A relation is a way of describing how two or more things are connected or related to each other. For example, "is the parent of," "is taller than," or "is friends with" are all relations that show how people or objects link together. In everyday terms, it's simply a pattern or connection that shows how one thing depends on, compares to, or associates with another.
heightened-scrutiny contexts(as a contrasting type of context)
Situations where we're being extremely careful and demanding about what counts as knowledge—like when a scientist has to meet very high standards of proof.
picks out(as used in language and reference)
Selects or refers to; in other words, what specific things a word is meant to point to or identify.
skeptical conclusions(as philosophical positions)
Conclusions that doubt or deny that we can know things; a skeptic argues we know much less (or nothing) than we normally think.