Dirk Kindermann
Dados Biográficos
| ID | 5996958 |
|---|---|
| NOME | Dirk Kindermann |
| PRENOMES | Dirk |
| SOBRENOME | Kindermann |
| ASSINATURA | KINDERMANN D |
| AFILIAÇÕES | University of Vienna |
| ORCID | 0000-0003-1821-3605 |
| VERIFICADO | Sim |
| TOTAL DE OBRAS | 3 |
| TOTAL DE CITAÇÕES | 0 |
| TOTAL COMO AUTOR | 3 |
| TOTAL COMO EDITOR | 0 |
| PRIMEIRO ANO DE PUBLICAÇÃO | 2021 |
| ANO MAIS RECENTE DE PUBLICAÇÃO | 2023 |
| ÍNDICE H | 0 |
Against ‘Hate Speech’
This article argues against the term and concept of ‘hate speech’ and in favour of using the concept and term ‘discriminatory speech’. ‘Hate speech’ is a misnomer; we should name the harmful speech in question by what it in fact does: it discriminates. The article argues for this conceptual replacement claim by identifying a number of functions the concept ‘hate speech’ has been meant to serve and by arguing that extant concepts of hate speech ha…
No way to WAM
Many epistemologists explain the empirically attested contextual variation in knowledge ascriptions by appeal to a kind of warranted assertability maneuver (WAM) that finds the locus of variability in epistemic norms of assertion. I show that this way to WAM fails. It cannot explain the variability of embedded uses of knowledge sentences in assertoric speech acts in which the knowledge sentences are not themselves asserted
Knowledge embedded
How should we account for the contextual variability of knowledge claims? Many philosophers favour an invariantist account on which such contextual variability is due entirely to pragmatic factors, leaving no interesting context-sensitivity in the semantic meaning of ‘know that.’ I reject this invariantist division of labor by arguing that pragmatic invariantists have no principled account of embedded occurrences of ‘ S knows/doesn’t know that p …
Sem obras proeminentes nesta página.
Knowledge embedded
How should we account for the contextual variability of knowledge claims? Many philosophers favour an invariantist account on which such contextual variability is due entirely to pragmatic factors, leaving no interesting context-sensitivity in the semantic meaning of ‘know that.’ I reject this invariantist division of labor by arguing that pragmatic invariantists have no principled account of embedded occurrences of ‘ S knows/doesn’t know that p …
No way to WAM
Many epistemologists explain the empirically attested contextual variation in knowledge ascriptions by appeal to a kind of warranted assertability maneuver (WAM) that finds the locus of variability in epistemic norms of assertion. I show that this way to WAM fails. It cannot explain the variability of embedded uses of knowledge sentences in assertoric speech acts in which the knowledge sentences are not themselves asserted
Against ‘Hate Speech’
This article argues against the term and concept of ‘hate speech’ and in favour of using the concept and term ‘discriminatory speech’. ‘Hate speech’ is a misnomer; we should name the harmful speech in question by what it in fact does: it discriminates. The article argues for this conceptual replacement claim by identifying a number of functions the concept ‘hate speech’ has been meant to serve and by arguing that extant concepts of hate speech ha…
Linguistics (3 obras) · Philosophy (3 obras) · Psychology (3 obras) · Computer Science (2 obras) · Epistemology (2 obras) · Epistemology, Ethics, and Metaphysics (2 obras) · Appeal (1 obras) · Assertion (1 obras) · Context (archaeology) (1 obras) · Contextualism (1 obras)