TY - JOUR T1 - Epistemický kontextualizmus a jeho motivácia JF - Organon F Y1 - 2013 A1 - Zouhar, Marián KW - Context of utterance vs. circumstances of evaluation KW - epistemic contextualism KW - epistemic standards KW - Keith DeRose KW - variable truth conditions (propositions) vs. stable truth conditions (propositions) AB - According to Keith DeRose, the best argument for epistemic contextualism is supplied by communication intuitions ordinary speakers have when evaluating utterances of sentences of the form “S knows that p” and “S does not know that p”. It is claimed that utterances of “S knows that p” and “S does not know that p” can both be true with respect to the same S and p because the speakers of the utterances employ different epistemic standards. The aim of the paper is to show that one can accept this claim as true while denying epistemic contextualism. A handful of possible contenders to epistemic contextualism are given. Thus, the alleged best argument for contextualism has to be supplemented by other arguments to show that epistemic contextualism should be given preference to the other approaches. IS - 2 VL - 20 SP - 171-186 UR - http://www.klemens.sav.sk/fiusav/doc/organon/prilohy/2013/2/171-186.pdf U3 - 171186 U5 - 1 TI - Epistemic Contextualism and Its Motivation ER -