Epistemological Justification according to Later Wittgenstein’s View from Foundationalism to Contextualism

Editorial

Authors

1 Assistant Professor at Payame Noor University, Bafgh,Yazdm Iran

2 Assistant Professor at Department of Islamic Philosophy and Kalam at Imam Sadiq University, Tehran, Iran

Abstract

As the claim of knowledge without presenting the sufficient ground or evidence is unjustified, the basis of contemporary epistemology is what the foundation of the system of human knowledge is and that from where this system originates and where it ends. According to later Wittgenstein, the description of the word without a number of basic and certain propositions is impossible. Although their certainty does not mean their correspondence with the fact, it relies upon the attitude of the individuals. What is certain and evident for us is determined by a language game in which one partakes. Therefore, the human knowledge in itself depends on his actions and characteristic behavioural patterns. Wittgenstein maintains that justification and rationality rest invariably on context and engage in social activities and language games. Since forms of life, worldpictures and world – views are different, there are various ways of rationality.
In this article, elucidating the tripartite definition of knowledge, we have dealt with the analysis of knowledge and its distinctive aspect with certainty from wittgenstein’s view. Then, referring to the structure of epistemological foundations in wittgenstein’s thought, we have mentioned it, why according to him, foundationalism fails to defend the validity of epistemological system and with taking the theory of contextualism, what difference will take place in the foundations of knowledge and the quality of the dependence of other sciences on them.
Finally, studying the theory of contextualism and elucidating a number of its advantages, we have explained that this theory allows a version of relativism and is not without some kind of skeptical tendencies.

Keywords

پلنتینجا، الوین و دیگران (1374)، کلام فلسفی (مجموعه مقالات)، ترجمه احمد نراقی و ابراهیم سلطانی، تهران: مؤسسة فرهنگی صراط، چا‌پ اول.
پترسون، مایکل و دیگران (1376)، عقل و اعتقاد دینی، ترجمه احمد نراقی و ابراهیم سلطانی، تهران: طرح نو، چاپ اول.
Annis, David (1993), “A Contextual Theory of Epistemic Justification”, in Louis P. Pojman, ed., The Theory of Knowledge: Classical and Contemporary Readings, California: Wadsworth Publishing Company.
Bogen, James (Jul. 1974), “Wittgenstein and Skepticism”, The Philosophical Review83, 364-373.
Cohen, Stewart (1999), “Contextualism, Skepticism, and the Structure of Reasons”, Nous, 33, 57-89.
Colby, Mark (1998), “The Epistomological Foundations of Practical Reason”, Inquiry, 42, 25-48.
Dain, Edmund (2006), “Contextualism and Nonsense in Wittgenstein’s Tractatus”, South African Journal of Philosophy, 25, 91-101.
Dawson, Graham (Oct. 1981), “Justified True Belief Is Knowledge”, The Philosophical Quarterly, 31, 315-329.
DeRose, Keith (Dec. 1992), “Contextualism and Knowledge Attributions”, Philosophy and Phenomenological Research, 52, 913-929.
Fogelin, Robert J. (1986), “Wittgenstein and Classical Scepticism”, in Stuart G. Shanker, ed.,Ludwig Wittgenstein: Critical Assessments, Wolfeboro, New Hampshire: Croom Helm, Vol. 2, 163-175.
Glock, Hans-Johann (1996), A Wittgenstein Dictionary, Oxford: Blackwell.
Hamlyn, D. W., (1967), “Epistemology, History of ”, in Paul Edwards, ed., The Encyclopedia of Philosophy, New York: Macmillen Publishing Company.
Hick, John H. (1993), “Religious Realism and Non-Realism”, in John Hick, ed., Disputed Questions in Theology and the Philosophy of Religion, New Haven, Conn: YaleUniversity Press.
Kober, Michael (1996), “Certainties of a World – Picture: The Epistemological Investigations of On Certainty”, in Hans Sluga and David G. Stern, eds., The Cambridge Companion to Wittgenstein, CambridgeUniversity Press.
Morawetz, Thomas (1980), Wittgenstein and Knowledge: The Importance of ‘on Certainty, USA: Humanities Press Inc.
Morris, Katherine J. (Jul. 1994), “The ‘Context Principle’ in the Later Wittgenstein”, The Philosophical Quarterly, 44, 294-310.
Olscamp, Paul J. (Dec. 1965), “Wittgenstein’s Refutation of Skepticism”, Philosophy and Phenomenological Research, 26, 239-247.
Plantinga, Alvin (2000), Warranted Christian Belief, New York: OxfordUniversity Press.
Pojman, Louise P. (2001), What Can We Know? An Introduction to the Theory of Knowledge, California: Wadsworth Publishing Company.
Pojman, Louis P., ed., (1993), The Theory of Knowledge: Classical and Contemporary Readings, California: Wasdsworth Publishing Company.
Stoutland, Frederick (Jul. 1998), “Wittgenstein: on Certainty and Truth”, Philosophical Investigations, 21, 203-221.
Williams, Michael (1991), Unnatural Doubts: Epistemological Realism and the Basis of Scepticism, Oxford: Basil Blackwell.
Id. (1999), “Skepticism”, in John Greco and Ernest Sosa, eds., The Blackwell Guide to Epistemology, Oxford: Blackwell.
Wittgenstein, Ludwig (1967), Zettel, ed. G. E. M. Anscombe and G. H. von Wright, trans. G. E. M. Anscombe, Oxford: Blackwell. (References are to Sections).
Id. (1969a), On Certainty, ed. G. E. M. Anscombe and G. H. von Wright, trans. D. Paul & G. E. M. Anscombe, Oxford: Blackwell. (References are to Sections).
Id. (1969b), Tractatus Logico-Philosophicus, trans. D. F. Pears and B. F. McGuinness, London: Routledge & Kegan Paul. (References are to numbered Sections).
Id. (1973), Philosophical Investigations, 3rd edn, ed. G. E. M. Anscombe and R. Rhees, trans. G. E. M. Anscombe, Oxford: Blackwell. (References are to Sections of Part I and to Pages of Part II).
Id. (1975), Philosophical Remarks, ed. Rush Rhees, trans. Raymond Hargreaves and Roger White, Oxford: Blackwell. (References are to Sections).
Id. (1980), Culture and Value, ed. G. H. von Wright in Collaboration with H. Hyman, trans. Peter Winch, Oxford: Blackwell.
Id. (1993), Philosophical Occasions 1912-1951, ed. James C. Klagge and Alfred Nordmann, Indianapolis and Cambridge, MA: Hackett.