The Problem of Evaluation
Date
2022
Authors
Journal Title
Journal ISSN
Volume Title
Publisher
Producer
Director
Performer
Choreographer
Costume Designer
Music
Videographer
Lighting Designer
Set Designer
Crew Member
Funder
Rehearsal Director
Concert Coordinator
Advisor
Moderator
Panelist
Alternative Title
Department
Haverford College. Department of Philosophy
Type
Thesis
Original Format
Running Time
File Format
Place of Publication
Date Span
Copyright Date
Award
Language
eng
Note
Table of Contents
Terms of Use
Rights Holder
Access Restrictions
Dark Archive
Terms of Use
Tripod URL
Identifier
Abstract
Is it possible to make progress on all philosophical arguments? Ordinarily, we are given to think that we can do just this by correcting any mistakes we perceive, but in order to have the ability to mount a challenge against an argument, it must be unchanging in some way and accessible to us to understand. On the face of it, this does not seem to be a problem as we invariably think of arguments existing in such a static form, but given that human experience is all but known to evolve both on biological and socio-cultural grounds, and thus our relationships with language and arguments may be changing, is this epistemic picture able to be upheld in our necessarily dynamic world? If it cannot be, what methodological resources do we require to allow us to make progress and if these in turn are not achievable, where does this leave the state of our progress and inquiries at large? Otherwise, if our long-held view is in fact correct, what supports the resolution of what seems to be a grave paradox?