Show simple item record

dc.contributor.authorMoyal-Sharrock, Daniele
dc.date.accessioned2013-06-17T10:30:43Z
dc.date.available2013-06-17T10:30:43Z
dc.date.issued2013
dc.identifier.citationMoyal-Sharrock , D 2013 , ' On Coliva's Judgmental Hinges ' , Philosophia , vol. 41 , no. 1 , pp. 13-25 . https://doi.org/10.1007/s11406-012-9400-7
dc.identifier.issn0048-3893
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/2299/10776
dc.description.abstractAnnalisa Coliva's Moore and Wittgenstein: Scepticism, Certainty, and Common Sense does On Certainty, and Wittgenstein generally, a great service: it is the first in-depth study of Moore and Wittgenstein that places On Certainty within current epistemology. By this I mean, that it discusses its content, reception and repercussions in the technical terms of current epistemology and in the midst of current epistemologists. But it also manages to do this without losing the non-specialist reader to the often bewildering jargon of epistemology, and without viewing hinge certainty as an epistemic certainty. There is much that I agree with in Coliva’s reading of On Certainty, but her view of hinges as both judgments and norms seems to me to go against the spirit and the letter of On Certainty. In what follows, I will be mainly concerned with that view, but will conclude by adding a few words on Coliva's rejection of foundationalism in On Certainty. [opening paragraph]en
dc.format.extent339382
dc.language.isoeng
dc.relation.ispartofPhilosophia
dc.subjectWittgenstein, certainty, epistemology, hinges
dc.titleOn Coliva's Judgmental Hingesen
dc.contributor.institutionPhilosophy
dc.contributor.institutionSchool of Humanities
dc.contributor.institutionSocial Sciences, Arts & Humanities Research Institute
dc.description.statusPeer reviewed
rioxxterms.versionofrecord10.1007/s11406-012-9400-7
rioxxterms.typeJournal Article/Review
herts.preservation.rarelyaccessedtrue


Files in this item

Thumbnail

This item appears in the following Collection(s)

Show simple item record