國立高雄大學圖資館 |

語系: 繁體中文

說明(常見問題)

圖資館首頁

登入

回首頁

切換: 標籤 | MARC模式 | ISBD

Epistemic relativism and scepticismu...

Bland, Steven.

Epistemic relativism and scepticismunwinding the braid /

紀錄類型:	書目-電子資源 : Monograph/item
正題名/作者:	Epistemic relativism and scepticismby Steven Bland.
其他題名:	unwinding the braid /
作者:	Bland, Steven.
出版者:	Cham :Springer International Publishing :2018.
面頁冊數:	xii, 234 p. :ill., digital ;24 cm.
Contained By:	Springer eBooks
標題:	Relativity.
電子資源:	http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-94673-3
ISBN:	9783319946733$q(electronic bk.)

Epistemic relativism and scepticismunwinding the braid /
Bland, Steven.

Epistemic relativism and scepticismunwinding the braid /[electronic resource] :by Steven Bland. - Cham :Springer International Publishing :2018. - xii, 234 p. :ill., digital ;24 cm.

Chapter 1: Introduction -- Chapter 2: The Principal Argument for Epistemic Relativism -- Chapter 3: Epistemic Relativism in the Analytic Tradition -- Chapter 4: Foundationalism and Coherentism -- Chapter 5: Externalism -- Chapter 6: Particularism and Methodism -- Chapter 7: The Charge of Incoherence -- Chapter 8: The Wittgensteinian Position -- Chapter 9: A Dialectical Strategy -- Chapter 10: Conclusions.

This book confronts the threats of epistemic relativism and Pyrrhonian scepticism to analytic philosophy. Epistemic relativists reject absolute notions of knowledge and justification, while sceptics claim that knowledge and justification of any kind are unattainable. If either of these views is correct, then there can be no objective basis for thinking that one set of methods does a better job of delivering accurate information than any other set of methods. Philosophers have generally sought to resist these threats by responding to the argument that seems to motivate both positions: the Agrippan trilemma. Steven Bland argues that this is a mistaken strategy. He surveys the most influential responses to the Agrippan trilemma, and shows that none of them succeeds in undermining epistemic relativism. Bland also offers a new, dialectical strategy of challenging epistemic relativism by uncovering how epistemic methods depend on one another for their applications. By means of this novel analysis, the book concludes that there are principled reasons to prefer naturalistic to non-naturalistic methods, even if these reasons do little to ease the threat of scepticism.

ISBN: 9783319946733$q(electronic bk.)

Standard No.: 10.1007/978-3-319-94673-3doiSubjects--Topical Terms:

268637
Relativity.

LC Class. No.: BD221 / .B536 2018

Dewey Class. No.: 121

Epistemic relativism and scepticismunwinding the braid /
LDR:02560nmm a2200325 a 4500 001 543279
003 DE-He213
005 20190214095946.0
006 m d
007 cr nn 008maaau
008 190411s2018 gw s 0 eng d
020 $a 9783319946733$q(electronic bk.)
020 $a 9783319946726$q(paper)
024 7 $a 10.1007/978-3-319-94673-3 $2 doi
025 2 4 $a nam a2200313 a 4500
035 $a 978-3-319-94673-3
040 $a GP $c GP
041 0 $a eng
050 4 $a BD221 $b .B536 2018
072 7 $a HPK $2 bicssc
072 7 $a PHI004000 $2 bisacsh
082 0 4 $a 121 $2 23
090 $a BD221 $b .B642 2018
100 1 $a Bland, Steven. $3 821491
245 1 0 $a Epistemic relativism and scepticism $h [electronic resource] : $b unwinding the braid / $c by Steven Bland.
260 $a Cham : $b Springer International Publishing : $b Imprint: Palgrave Macmillan, $c 2018.
300 $a xii, 234 p. : $b ill., digital ; $c 24 cm.
505 0 $a Chapter 1: Introduction -- Chapter 2: The Principal Argument for Epistemic Relativism -- Chapter 3: Epistemic Relativism in the Analytic Tradition -- Chapter 4: Foundationalism and Coherentism -- Chapter 5: Externalism -- Chapter 6: Particularism and Methodism -- Chapter 7: The Charge of Incoherence -- Chapter 8: The Wittgensteinian Position -- Chapter 9: A Dialectical Strategy -- Chapter 10: Conclusions.
520 $a This book confronts the threats of epistemic relativism and Pyrrhonian scepticism to analytic philosophy. Epistemic relativists reject absolute notions of knowledge and justification, while sceptics claim that knowledge and justification of any kind are unattainable. If either of these views is correct, then there can be no objective basis for thinking that one set of methods does a better job of delivering accurate information than any other set of methods. Philosophers have generally sought to resist these threats by responding to the argument that seems to motivate both positions: the Agrippan trilemma. Steven Bland argues that this is a mistaken strategy. He surveys the most influential responses to the Agrippan trilemma, and shows that none of them succeeds in undermining epistemic relativism. Bland also offers a new, dialectical strategy of challenging epistemic relativism by uncovering how epistemic methods depend on one another for their applications. By means of this novel analysis, the book concludes that there are principled reasons to prefer naturalistic to non-naturalistic methods, even if these reasons do little to ease the threat of scepticism.
650 0 $a Relativity. $3 268637
650 0 $a Skepticism. $3 221623
650 0 $a Social epistemology. $3 233265
650 1 4 $a Philosophy. $3 176573
650 2 4 $a Epistemology. $3 275100
650 2 4 $a Electoral Politics. $3 739989
710 2 $a SpringerLink (Online service) $3 273601
773 0 $t Springer eBooks
856 4 0 $u http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-94673-3
950 $a Religion and Philosophy (Springer-41175)