-
557Power, Soft or Deep? An Attempt at Constructive CriticismLas Torres de Lucca: Revista Internacional de Filosofía Política 6 (10): 177-214. 2017.This paper discusses and criticizes Joseph Nye’s account of soft power. First, we set the stage and make some general remarks about the notion of social power. In the main part of this paper we offer a detailed critical discussion of Nye’s conception of soft power. We conclude that it is too unclear and confused to be of much analytical use. However, despite this failure, Nye is aiming at explaining an important but also neglected form of social power: the power to influence the will and not jus…Read more
-
222The Case for Contextualism: Knowledge, Skepticism, and Context, Vol. I – Keith DeRosePhilosophical Quarterly 60 (239): 424-427. 2010.A review and discussion of Keith DeRose's "The Case for Contextualism".
-
173Was Moore a Moorean? On Moore and ScepticismEuropean Journal of Philosophy 17 (2): 181-200. 2009.One of the most important views in the recent discussion of epistemological scepticism is Neo-Mooreanism. It turns a well-known kind of sceptical argument (the dreaming argument and its different versions) on its head by starting with ordinary knowledge claims and concluding that we know that we are not in a sceptical scenario. This paper argues that George Edward Moore was not a Moorean in this sense. Moore replied to other forms of scepticism than those mostly discussed nowadays. His own anti-…Read more
-
23Review of McDowell, John. Mind and World (review)Principia: An International Journal of Epistemology 2 (1): 135-144. 1998.Review of McDowell, John. Mind and World.
-
26If You Believe, You BelieveLogos and Episteme 8 (4): 389-416. 2017.Can I be wrong about my own beliefs? More precisely: Can I falsely believe that I believe that p? I argue that the answer is negative. This runs against what many philosophers and psychologists have traditionally thought and still think. I use a rather new kind of argument, – one that is based on considerations about Moore's paradox. It shows that if one believes that one believes that p then one believes that p – even though one can believe that p without believing that one believes that p.
-
48Is Everything Revisable?Ergo: An Open Access Journal of Philosophy 4. 2017.Over the decades, the claim that everything is revisable (defended by Quine and others) has played an important role in Epistemology and Philosophy of Science. Some time ago, Katz (1988) argued that this claim is paradoxical. This paper does not discuss this objection but rather argues that the claim of universal revisability allows for two different readings but in each case leads to a contradiction and is false.
-
11Davidson on Sharing a Language and Correct Language-UseGrazer Philosophische Studien 52 (1): 137-160. 1996.Donald Davidson has argued against a thesis that is widely shared in the philosophy of language, e.g., by Wittgenstein, Dummett and Kripke: the thesis that successful communication requires that speaker and hearer share a common language. Davidson's arguments, however, are not convincing. Moreover, Davidson's own positive account of communication poses a serious problem: it cannot offer criteria for the correct use of a language, especially in the case of a language that only one speaker speaks.…Read more
-
422If You Believe You Believe, You Believe. A Constitutive Account of Knowledge of One’s Own BeliefsLogos and Episteme 389-416. 2017.Can I be wrong about my own beliefs? More precisely: Can I falsely believe that I believe that p? I argue that the answer is negative. This runs against what many philosophers and psychologists have traditionally thought and still think. I use a rather new kind of argument, – one that is based on considerations about Moore's paradox. It shows that if one believes that one believes that p then one believes that p – even though one can believe that p without believing that one believes that p.
-
346Is Everything Revisable?Ergo: An Open Access Journal of Philosophy 4 349-357. 2017.Over the decades, the claim that everything is revisable (defended by Quine and others) has played an important role in Epistemology and Philosophy of Science. Some time ago, Katz (1988) argued that this claim is paradoxical. This paper does not discuss this objection but rather argues that the claim of universal revisability allows for two different readings but in each case leads to a contradiction and is false.
-
397Epistemic Contrastivism, Knowledge and Practical ReasoningErkenntnis 81 (1): 59-68. 2016.Epistemic contrastivism is the view that knowledge is a ternary relation between a person, a proposition and a set of contrast propositions. This view is in tension with widely shared accounts of practical reasoning: be it the claim that knowledge of the premises is necessary for acceptable practical reasoning based on them or sufficient for the acceptability of the use of the premises in practical reasoning, or be it the claim that there is a looser connection between knowledge and practical re…Read more
-
23¿ Se puede saber lo que se quiere?Ideas Y Valores 44 (96-97): 3-22. 1995.Can one come to know what one wants? In some very simple cases, the answer has to be positive but in some other cases the answer is not so clear. The answer depends on what kind of self-knowledge one is taking about. This article also aims at elucidating the notion of knowledge of one's own desires.
-
583Knowledge across Contexts. A Problem for Subject-Sensitive InvariantismDialogue 55 (2): 363-380. 2016.The possibility of knowledge attributions across contexts (where attributor and subject find themselves in different epistemic contexts) can create serious problems for certain views of knowledge. Amongst such views is subject—sensitive invariantism—the view that knowledge is determined not only by epistemic factors (belief, truth, evidence, etc.) but also by non—epistemic factors (practical interests, etc.). I argue that subject—sensitive invariantism either runs into a contradiction or has to …Read more
-
133Problems for Sinnott-Armstrong's moral contrastivismPhilosophical Quarterly 58 (232). 2008.In his recent book Moral Skepticisms Walter Sinnott-Armstrong argues in great detail for contrastivism with respect to justified moral belief and moral knowledge. I raise three questions concerning this view. First, how would Sinnott-Armstrong account for constraints on admissible contrast classes? Secondly, how would he deal with notorious problems concerning relevant reference classes? Finally, how can he account for basic features of moral agency? It turns out that the last problem is the mos…Read more
-
1247Defending the One Percent? Poor Arguments for the Rich?The Harvard Review of Philosophy XXI 21 106-112. 2014.This is a reply to and critique of Gregory Mankiw's recent paper "Defending the One Percent".
-
Der Denker als Seiltänzer. Ludwig Wittgenstein über Religion, Mystik und Ethik (review)Zeitschrift für Philosophische Forschung 57 (1). 2003.
-
2Müller, Synonymie und Analytizität: Zwei sinnvolle Begriffe (review)Allgemeine Zeitschrift für Philosophie 24 (1): 94-99. 1999.
-
82A Puzzle About Responsibility: A Problem and its Contextualist SolutionErkenntnis 74 (2): 207-224. 2011.This paper presents a puzzle about moral responsibility. The problem is based upon the indeterminacy of relevant reference classes as applied to action. After discussing and rejecting a very tempting response I propose moral contextualism instead, that is, the idea that the truth value of judgments of the form S is morally responsible for x depends on and varies with the context of the attributor who makes that judgment. Even if this reply should not do all the expected work it is a first step.
-
93Justification and the Truth-Connection By Clayton Littlejohn (review)Analysis 74 (4): 731-733. 2014.Review of Littlejohn, "Justification and the Truth Connection".
-
978To Thine Own Self Be Untrue: A Diagnosis of the Cable Guy ParadoxLogique Et Analyse 51 (204): 355-364. 2008.Hájek has recently presented the following paradox. You are certain that a cable guy will visit you tomorrow between 8 a.m. and 4 p.m. but you have no further information about when. And you agree to a bet on whether he will come in the morning interval (8, 12] or in the afternoon interval (12, 4). At first, you have no reason to prefer one possibility rather than the other. But you soon realise that there will definitely be a future time at which you will (rationally) assign higher proba…Read more
-
Response to Schaffer's ReplyIn Stefan Tolksdorf (ed.), Conceptions of Knowledge, De Gruyter. pp. 425-431. 2011.This is a response to Jonathan Schaffer's reply to my criticism of contrastivism.
-
34Gerhard Ernst: Das problem Des wissens, paderborn: Mentis 2002Grazer Philosophische Studien 68 (1): 221-223. 2005.Review of Ernst, "Das Problem des Wissens".
-
337The Scottish Pragmatist? The Dilemma of Common Sense and the Pragmatist Way OutReid Studies 2 (2): 47-58. 1999.One of the great attractions of Thomas Reid's account of knowledge is that he attempted to avoid the alternative between skepticism and dogmatism. This attempt, however, faces serious problems. It is argued here that there is a pragmatist way out of the problems, and that there are even hints to this solution in Reid's writings.
-
Kant y el yoIn Felipe Castañeda, Vincente Durán & Luis Eduardo Hoyos (eds.), Immanuel Kant: vigencia de la filosofía crítica, Siglo Del Hombre Editores. pp. 79-89. 2007.An interpretation and discussion of Kant's theory of the self.
-
1Epistemic contractsIn Georg Meggle (ed.), Social Facts and Collective Intentionality. Philosophische Forschung / Philosophical research, Dr. Hänsel-hohenhausen. pp. 1--19. 2002.The idea of a social contract has played a major role in modern political philosophy but not in modern epistemology, -- not even in more recent "social theories of knowledge". The idea of an epistemic contract, however, is very interesting and deserves more attention. In this paper, I discuss arguments to the effect that we cannot do without epistemic contracts. I come to the conclusion that these arguments are not convincing. If one wants to make use of contractarian arguments in epistemology, …Read more
-
Handlung, Absicht und InstrumentalitätIn Christoph Hubig, Andreas Luckner & Nadia Mazouz (eds.), Handeln und Technik - mit und ohne Heidegger, Lit-verlag. pp. 77-82. 2007.This paper argues that two types of action - routine action and affective action - have been neglected in current action theory. Inquiry into these kinds of action can lead to interesting insights.
-
170On ReflectionPhilosophical Quarterly 64 (256): 510-512. 2014.Review of Kornblith, "On Reflection".
-
DisculpasIn Flor Emilce Cely & William Duica (eds.), Intersubjetividad. Ensayos filosóficos sobre autoconciencia, sujeto y acción, Universidad Nacional De Colombia. pp. 271-281. 2009.A discussion of different aspects (including the logical form) of apologies.
-
124Counting on numbersAnalysis 69 (3): 446-448. 2009.1. Here is a very simple game. You come up with a number and I come up with a number. If I come up with the higher number, I win; otherwise you win. You go first. Call this ‘The Very Simple Game’. Few would play it if they had to go first and many if they are guaranteed to go second.2. Here is another one. You come up with a number n and I come up with a number m. If m times 1/ n > 1, then I win; if not, then you win. You go first. Call this ‘Still The Very Simple Game’. Since I win just in case…Read more
Swarthmore, Pennsylvania, United States of America
Areas of Specialization
Epistemology |
Philosophy of Mind |
17th/18th Century Philosophy |
Areas of Interest
Epistemology |
17th/18th Century Philosophy |