CLASSIC INVARIANTISM, RELEVANCE AND WARRANTED ASSERTABILITY MANŒVRES
Article first published online: 14 JUL 2005
DOI: 10.1111/j.0031-8094.2005.00402.x
Additional Information
How to Cite
Black, T. (2005), CLASSIC INVARIANTISM, RELEVANCE AND WARRANTED ASSERTABILITY MANŒVRES. The Philosophical Quarterly, 55: 328–336. doi: 10.1111/j.0031-8094.2005.00402.x
Publication History
- Issue published online: 14 JUL 2005
- Article first published online: 14 JUL 2005
Jessica Brown contends that Keith DeRose's latest argument for contextualism fails to rule out contextualism's chief rival, namely, classic invariantism. Still, even if their position has not been ruled out, classic invariantists must offer considerations in favour of their position if they are to show that it is superior to contextualism. Brown defends classic invariantism with a warranted assertability manœvre that utilizes a linguistic pragmatic principle of relevance. I argue, however, that this manœvre is not as effective as it might be. I propose a different warranted assertability manœvre, which utilizes a pragmatic principle of strength, affords a more successful defence of classic invariantism, and helps to establish that classic invariantism is superior to contextualism.

1467-9213/asset/phiq_left.gif?v=1&s=3e274098c3602f7d5c300f7ed97c5b12d7c2071e)
1467-9213/asset/phiq_right.gif?v=1&s=76fc4763c4f37b4ca3c89c416a602d845233e5ec)
1467-9213/asset/cover.gif?v=1&s=4c88bb37c0d1ac3a4cdf1f9c54754f293a87d73c)