语境主义的异议与辩护  

Objections to and Defense of Contextualism

作　　者：曹剑波[1,2] 

机构地区：[1]厦门大学哲学系,福建厦门361005 [2]厦门大学知识论与认知科学研究中心,福建厦门361005

出　　处：《徐州工程学院学报（社会科学版）》2014年第1期12-18,共7页Journal of Xuzhou Institute of Technology：Social Sciences Edition

基　　金：福建省教育科学"十二五"规划常规课题重点项目"道德教育的实验哲学研究"(FJCGZZ12-003);中央高校基本科研业务费专项资金资助项目"实验哲学"(2012221003);教育部新世纪优秀人才支持计划"实验知识论"(NCET-11-0290)

摘　　要：语境主义是现有解答怀疑主义难题中最合理的理论。然而,对于语境主义解答方案,许多知识论者提出了各种不同的异议。这些异议概括地说有来自无用论的异议、来自缺陷论的异议和来自替代论的异议。分析发现反语境主义者对语境主义的批判要么是误解的,要么是无关痛痒的,要么是可辩解的。因此,虽然语境主义有需要修正之处,但是说"语境主义仍是现有解答怀疑主义难题中最合理的理论"是成立的。Contextualism is the most epistemologists have raised a variety of objections from uselessness, defects and reasonable theory to resolve skeptical problems. However,a lot of objections to contextualist answers. These objections include the alternative theories. After analyzing these objections,it is easy tofind that the anti-contextual objections to contextualism are either misunderstood,or irrelevant, or rebutta- ble. Thus, although the contextualism still need improving, the statement that contextualism is still the most reasonable theory to resolve skeptical problems now is still true.

关 键 词：语境主义 怀疑主义难题 反语境主义 

分 类 号：B017[哲学宗教—哲学理论]