Combining Texts

All the ideas for '67: Platonic Questions', 'Contextualism Defended (and reply)' and 'Roman Law'

unexpand these ideas     |    start again     |     specify just one area for these texts


7 ideas

13. Knowledge Criteria / C. External Justification / 6. Contextual Justification / a. Contextualism
Our own intuitions about whether we know tend to vacillate [Cohen,S]
     Full Idea: One robust feature of our intuitions about whether we know things is that they tend to vacillate.
     From: Stewart Cohen (Contextualism Defended (and reply) [2005], 1)
     A reaction: This strikes me as important. If we were tacit invariantists (Idea 19557) we should be able to ask ourselves whether we 'really and truly' know various things, but we can't decide. I know lots about Nietzsche in a pub, and very little in a university.
We shouldn't jump too quickly to a contextualist account of claims to know [Cohen,S]
     Full Idea: Maybe contextualists are too quick to appeal to our conflicting intuitions regarding knowledge.
     From: Stewart Cohen (Contextualism Defended (and reply) [2005], 1)
     A reaction: An important point (from Earl Conee). I thoroughly approve of contextualism, but the whole status of whether a witness or a teacher knows what they are talking about is in danger of collapsing into relativism. This is what peer review is all about.
The context sensitivity of knowledge derives from its justification [Cohen,S]
     Full Idea: On my own view, the context sensivity of knowledge is inherited from one of its components, i.e. justification.
     From: Stewart Cohen (Contextualism Defended (and reply) [2005], 1)
     A reaction: That sounds right, and it reinforces the idea that 'justification' is a more important epistemological concept than 'knowledge'. 'Am I justified in believing p?' Answer: 'it depends how well you have researched it'.
Contextualism is good because it allows knowledge, but bad because 'knowing' is less valued [Cohen,S]
     Full Idea: Contextualism is a 'good news, bad news' theory. The good news is that we have lots of knowledge and many surfaces are 'flat'; the bad news is that knowledge and flatness are not all they were cracked up to be.
     From: Stewart Cohen (Contextualism Defended (and reply) [2005], 3)
     A reaction: That is exactly my position. I lost all interest in whether someone precisely 'knows' or 'does not know' something a long time ago (even in scientific or forensic contexts). In the case of flatness the case is even more obvious.
13. Knowledge Criteria / D. Scepticism / 6. Scepticism Critique
Contextualists slightly concede scepticism, but only in extremely strict contexts [Cohen,S]
     Full Idea: Contextualism concedes that there is some truth to skepticism, but contains the damage by holding that skeptical claims are true only relative to atypically strict contexts.
     From: Stewart Cohen (Contextualism Defended (and reply) [2005], 1)
     A reaction: My attitude to scepticism is that everything we ever affirm should have a footnote saying '...but you never know...', and it should then be ignored. In the strictest context everything is doubted simultaneously (including language), and that is paralysis.
15. Nature of Minds / A. Nature of Mind / 2. Psuche
When the soul is intelligent and harmonious, it is part of god and derives from god [Plutarch]
     Full Idea: The soul, when it has partaken of intelligence and reason and concord, is not merely a work but also a part of god and has come to be not by his agency but both from him as source and out of his substance.
     From: Plutarch (67: Platonic Questions [c.85], II.1001)
     A reaction: A most intriguing shift of view from earlier concepts of the psuché. How did this come about? This man is a pagan. The history is in the evolution of Platonism. See 'The Middle Platonists' by John Dillon. Davidson is also very impressed by reason.
25. Social Practice / D. Justice / 3. Punishment / a. Right to punish
No crime and no punishment without a law [Roman law]
     Full Idea: An ancient principle of Roman law states, nullum crimen et nulla poene sine lege, - there is no crime and no punishment without a law.
     From: [Roman law] (Roman Law [c.100]), quoted by A.C. Grayling - Among the Dead Cities Ch.6
     A reaction: That there is no 'punishment' without law seems the basis of civilization. Suppose a strong person imposed firm punishment in order to forestall more brutal revenge by others? What motivates the creation of criminal laws?