O contextualismo na epistemologia contemporânea

• Ano de defesa: 2011
• Autor(a) principal: Rodrigues, Tiegüe Vieira
• Orientador(a): Almeida, Cláudio Gonçalves de
• Tipo de documento: Tese
• Tipo de acesso: Acesso aberto
• Idioma: por
• Instituição de defesa: Pontifícia Universidade Católica do Rio Grande do Sul; Porto Alegre
• Palavras-chave em Português: FILOSOFIA; EPISTEMOLOGIA; JUSTIFICAÇÃO (FILOSOFIA); CONTEXTUALISMO (FILOSOFIA); PARADOXO (FILOSOFIA)
• Link de acesso: http://hdl.handle.net/10923/3470

This essay is on Contextualism in Epistemology. More precisely, it is on the semantic thesis in which knowledge attributions of instances ot the form ‘S knows that P’ are context-sensitive. Contextualism has been extensively debated over the past thirty years dealing with central issues in contemporary epistemology. According to the proponents of this theory it offers the best explanation to some key problems in epistemology such as: the problem raised by skeptical paradoxes; preserves our ordinary claims and attributions of knowledge; preserves important logical principles, e. g., the principle of deductive closure. We will present three distinct approaches to contextualism - proposed by Stewart Cohen, Keith DeRose and David Lewis - examining the singularities and implications of each one. We will also examine some signiticant objections to the contextualist thesis, which seek to emphasize the major problems for this theory. However, we do not intend to offer a definitive answer, neither for nor against Contextualism. Therefore, our thesis proposal is that, despite all objections, the contextualist account is far from being refuted, showing us the possibility and need for further investigation. Finally, we originally present a version of the preface paradox that we believe is suitable for a contextualist resolution.