Article Title：Skeptical parasitism and the continuity argument
Abstract：
Recent literature on skepticism has raised a nearly univocal voice in condemning skeptical argumentation on the grounds that such argumentation necessarily involves our adopting some nonordinary or unnatural perspective, which skeptics think they do; we would be 'insulated' from any such conclusions. I argue that skeptical argumentation need not rely on any nonordinary or unnatural standards. Rather, the skeptic's procedure is to offer a critique from within. Having given my argument for this claim (which I call the Continuity Argument), I consider and respond to two important objections. I conclude that the skeptic has a powerful meta-argument to be deployed in defending the legitimacy of his skeptical conclusions against the slings and arrows of (those I call) the half-true theorists.
Keywords: skepticism; knowledge; epistemic standards; insulation; contextualism; the ordinary; the familiar
DOI: 10.1111/j.1467-9973.2004.00346.x
Source：METAPHILOSOPHY
Welcome to correct the error, please contact email: humanisticspider@gmail.com
