structure for 'Knowledge Criteria'    |     alphabetical list of themes    |     expand these ideas

13. Knowledge Criteria / C. External Justification / 6. Contextual Justification / b. Invariantism

[denial that standards of knowledge vary with context]

10 ideas
The meaning of 'know' does not change from courtroom to living room [Unger]
How could 'S knows he has hands' not have a fixed content? [Bach]
If contextualism is right, knowledge sentences are baffling out of their context [Bach]
Sceptics aren't changing the meaning of 'know', but claiming knowing is tougher than we think [Bach]
There aren't invariant high standards for knowledge, because even those can be raised [Cohen,S]
If contextualism is about knowledge attribution, rather than knowledge, then it is philosophy of language [DeRose]
Maybe low knowledge standards are loose talk; people will deny that it is 'really and truly' knowledge [Conee]
Maybe knowledge has fixed standards (high, but attainable), although people apply contextual standards [Conee]
That standards vary with context doesn't imply different truth-conditions for judgements [Conee]
Maybe there is only one context (the 'really and truly' one) for serious discussions of knowledge [Conee]