Skepticism and knowledge in society
Skeptics ask whether we know anything at all; social epistemology asks how knowledge is shared, trusted, and sometimes unfairly withheld.
Radical skepticism
Descartes asked whether a powerful deceiver could be feeding him false experiences. A modern version imagines being a brain in a vat. Since such experiences would feel identical to normal ones, the skeptic argues, we cannot rule the scenario out, and so cannot know even that we have hands. Responses range from finding certain foundations to rejecting the demand for certainty.
Contextualism
Contextualists suggest that the standard for 'knowing' shifts with the conversation. In everyday talk, 'I know my car is in the lot' is true. In a philosophy seminar discussing deceiving demons, the standard rises and the same sentence may be false. This explains why skeptical arguments feel compelling without making ordinary knowledge claims mistaken.
Testimony and epistemic injustice
Most of what we know comes from testimony: teachers, books, experts, and friends. Miranda Fricker described testimonial injustice, when someone is believed less because of prejudice about who they are, and hermeneutical injustice, when a group lacks shared concepts to make sense of its experience. Both show that knowledge is also a social and ethical matter.
Flashcard
Doubt that knowledge, or certain knowledge, is possible
Check your understanding
A doctor dismisses a patient's accurate description of her symptoms because of stereotypes about her age. What is this an example of?