What is ‘relativism’ in his sense of the term? (Remember it’s not merely the claim that there are cultural differences with respect to beliefs or practices.)

Note: They have to be in depth , if you are not good at phislosophy pelase dont take it

Answer these from the reading provided


-What is ‘relativism’ in his sense of the term? (Remember it’s not merely the claim that there are cultural differences with respect to beliefs or practices.)

-What is his main argument for relativism in this paper? (Hint: This is the ‘inference to the best explanation’ we discussed in class.)

-Two objections to this argument: “Deny variation” and “Deny that variation matters”

-Why does Prinz think that objectivist theories are inferior to relativism? (Here you need to remember his claim that an objectivist theory is reasonable only if it provides a good explanation of the source or basis of any supposedly objective moral values. And since he thinks no such explanation is possible, he rejects objectivist theories. For example, he thinks objective morality or moral truth can’t be based on God’s commands, or human nature, or reason…)


-What are the three conditions on an adequate theory of truth, according to him?

-Why does he think there could be no truth if there were no consciousness?

-Two objections to the coherence theory of truth: (1) There could be more than one coherent system of beliefs, and (2) The idea of coherence depends on the idea of truth.

-What is “correspondence” and why does Russell think that a correspondence theory best satisfies his three conditions on an adequate theory of truth? (Remember that we are not going to be concerned here with the details of his “multiple relation” theory of correspondence–this is just a specific version of correspondence, not essential to the general idea.)

(1) Putnam

– The problem of skepticism. (How can we know or reasonably believe anything about the external world when our evidence could be just as it is even if we were brains in a vat?)

– Nagel’s objections to various ideas about how we manage to ‘represent’ or refer to things. (For example, resemblance is not necessary or sufficient because the words ‘Winston Churchill’ do not resemble Winston Churchill but the ant’s lines in the sand to resemble him.)

– Why isn’t it enough that one intends to refer to something? (For example, the human artist intends to depict Churchill but the ant doesn’t?)

– Why does Nagel claim that if we were brains in a vat we couldn’t wonder whether we were brains in a vat?

(2) Gettier

– The justified true belief analysis of knowledge. (Remember his aim is not merely to show that a belief can be justified but not true.)

– Two principles about justification, discussed in class. Know how these apply in his two stories.

– How do the stories show that a person can have a justified true belief but not knowledge?

(3) Goldman

– The analysis of knowledge in terms of appropriate causal relations. How this is meant to solve Gettier problems.

– Simple cases such as perceptual knowledge: here the appropriate relation is that the belief is caused by the fact that makes the belief true.

– How does he deal with memory-based knowledge?

– The role of inference (i.e., reasoning) in Goldman’s theory. What does he mean in saying that, when you have inference-based knowledge, you have ‘correctly reconstructed’ the causes of your belief? (Think of the story about the lava, for example.)


15% off for this assignment.

Our Prices Start at $11.99. As Our First Client, Use Coupon Code GET15 to claim 15% Discount This Month!!

Why US?

100% Confidentiality

Information about customers is confidential and never disclosed to third parties.

Timely Delivery

No missed deadlines – 97% of assignments are completed in time.

Original Writing

We complete all papers from scratch. You can get a plagiarism report.

Money Back

If you are convinced that our writer has not followed your requirements, feel free to ask for a refund.

Open chat
Hello. Welcome to Quality Academic Help. How can we help you?