In this thesis we propose a skeptical scenario about a priori knowledge. The scenario is composed of three main arguments: the a priori brain-in-a-vat argument, the problem of deduction, and the rule–following paradox. We propose a solution for a priori skepticism that is based on two philosophical schools: conventionalism and contextualism. Finally, we provide a sufficient condition – although hard to satisfy – for relieving a priori skepticism.
MA in Philosophy
Committee Member 1
Committee Member 2
The author retains all rights with regard to copyright. The author certifies that written permission from the owner(s) of third-party copyrighted matter included in the thesis, dissertation, paper, or record of study has been obtained. The author further certifies that IRB approval has been obtained for this thesis, or that IRB approval is not necessary for this thesis. Insofar as this thesis, dissertation, paper, or record of study is an educational record as defined in the Family Educational Rights and Privacy Act (FERPA) (20 USC 1232g), the author has granted consent to disclosure of it to anyone who requests a copy.
Institutional Review Board (IRB) Approval
Not necessary for this item
(2016).A priori skepticism, conventionalism and contextualism [Master’s thesis, the American University in Cairo]. AUC Knowledge Fountain.
Salem, Sherif Mohamed Gamal. A priori skepticism, conventionalism and contextualism. 2016. American University in Cairo, Master's thesis. AUC Knowledge Fountain.