知识归赋中风险效应之争探微

The Debates over the Stakes Effect in Knowledge Attributions

知识归赋指对某人是否有知识的判断。知识归赋是否有风险效应,不仅是当代知识论研究中最核心的问题之一,而且是实验知识论和大众知识论争论中最激烈的问题。理智主义者认为,知识归赋只与真理因素有关,与风险等实践因素无涉;反理智主义者认为,知识归赋还受实践因素尤其是风险高低的影响。知识归赋中风险效应的批评者,由于在他们的实验中没有发现风险效应,因此提出了不存在批评;由于认为风险效应可还原为其他因素,因而提出了可还原批评;由于风险效应可能导致令人尴尬的反事实现象,因而提出了反事实批评。分析未发现风险效应的原因,以及反驳各种批评,可为知识归赋中的风险效应提供辩护,并捍卫主流的、反理智主义知识论的合理性。

Knowledge attributions mean the judgment of whether someone has knowledge.Whether knowledge attributions have stakes effects is not only one of the core problems in contemporary epistemology,but also the most intensely discussed problem in the debates between experimental epistemology and folk epistemology.Rationalists hold that knowledge attributions are merely related to the factors of truth and has nothing to do with practical factors such as stakes.Anti-rationalists hold that knowledge attributions are also affected by practical factors,especially the level of stakes.The critics of stakes effects in knowledge attributions hold non-existent criticism because they did not find the stakes effect in their experiments.Considering that the stakes effect can be reduced to other factors,they hold reducible criticism.Considering that the stakes effect may lead to the embarrassing counterfactual phenomenon,they hold counterfactual criticism.After analyzing the reasons why stakes effect is not found and refuting various criticisms,the paper can defend the stakes effect in knowledge attributions and defend the rationality of the mainstream anti-rational epistemology.