The Pragmatic Gettier: Brandom on Knowledge and Belief

Knowledge and belief fully display the pragmatic features that make of them different concepts only in third-person epistemic attributions. This is the main thesis of this paper, which has three sections. In section 1 I argue, following a pragmatic reading of Gettier, that agents on their own light...

Full description

Bibliographic Details
Main Author: María José Frápolli Sanz
Format: Article
Language:English
Published: Disputatio Editions-IAR 2019-06-01
Series:Disputatio
Subjects:
Online Access:https://studiahumanitatis.eu/ojs/index.php/disputatio/article/view/152
id doaj-809bdd3cacc94f368f451d1f6e78cf60
record_format Article
spelling doaj-809bdd3cacc94f368f451d1f6e78cf602021-09-13T11:27:16ZengDisputatio Editions-IARDisputatio2254-06012019-06-018910.5281/zenodo.2652385The Pragmatic Gettier: Brandom on Knowledge and BeliefMaría José Frápolli Sanz0Universidad de Granada, Spain Knowledge and belief fully display the pragmatic features that make of them different concepts only in third-person epistemic attributions. This is the main thesis of this paper, which has three sections. In section 1 I argue, following a pragmatic reading of Gettier, that agents on their own lights cannot tell the difference between what they know and what they believe that they know. The reason lies on the pragmatic peculiarities of normative notions, which according to Brandom’s normative expressivism amount to saying that first-person epistemic claims lack the required complexity to ground a complete contrasting analysis of the concepts of knowledge and belief. Section 2 deals with the norms of assertion and elaborates in more classical terms something that follows from Brandom’s treatment of assertions, i.e. that assertions are expressions of belief that must be taken as knowledge claims. Finally, in section 3, I propose to explain the link between third person ascriptions and first person avowals by borrowing one of Ramsey’s hints on truth ascriptions to derive the role of the latter from that of the former. First-person epistemic claims, I suggest, are essentially the result of reactive actions, being their role dependent upon the functioning of third-person attributions. https://studiahumanitatis.eu/ojs/index.php/disputatio/article/view/152AssertionEpistemic ClaimsEpistemic AttributionsExpressivismRamsey
collection DOAJ
language English
format Article
sources DOAJ
author María José Frápolli Sanz
spellingShingle María José Frápolli Sanz
The Pragmatic Gettier: Brandom on Knowledge and Belief
Disputatio
Assertion
Epistemic Claims
Epistemic Attributions
Expressivism
Ramsey
author_facet María José Frápolli Sanz
author_sort María José Frápolli Sanz
title The Pragmatic Gettier: Brandom on Knowledge and Belief
title_short The Pragmatic Gettier: Brandom on Knowledge and Belief
title_full The Pragmatic Gettier: Brandom on Knowledge and Belief
title_fullStr The Pragmatic Gettier: Brandom on Knowledge and Belief
title_full_unstemmed The Pragmatic Gettier: Brandom on Knowledge and Belief
title_sort pragmatic gettier: brandom on knowledge and belief
publisher Disputatio Editions-IAR
series Disputatio
issn 2254-0601
publishDate 2019-06-01
description Knowledge and belief fully display the pragmatic features that make of them different concepts only in third-person epistemic attributions. This is the main thesis of this paper, which has three sections. In section 1 I argue, following a pragmatic reading of Gettier, that agents on their own lights cannot tell the difference between what they know and what they believe that they know. The reason lies on the pragmatic peculiarities of normative notions, which according to Brandom’s normative expressivism amount to saying that first-person epistemic claims lack the required complexity to ground a complete contrasting analysis of the concepts of knowledge and belief. Section 2 deals with the norms of assertion and elaborates in more classical terms something that follows from Brandom’s treatment of assertions, i.e. that assertions are expressions of belief that must be taken as knowledge claims. Finally, in section 3, I propose to explain the link between third person ascriptions and first person avowals by borrowing one of Ramsey’s hints on truth ascriptions to derive the role of the latter from that of the former. First-person epistemic claims, I suggest, are essentially the result of reactive actions, being their role dependent upon the functioning of third-person attributions.
topic Assertion
Epistemic Claims
Epistemic Attributions
Expressivism
Ramsey
url https://studiahumanitatis.eu/ojs/index.php/disputatio/article/view/152
work_keys_str_mv AT mariajosefrapollisanz thepragmaticgettierbrandomonknowledgeandbelief
AT mariajosefrapollisanz pragmaticgettierbrandomonknowledgeandbelief
_version_ 1717381031981481984