Abstract

Epistemic relativism rests on the existence of a plurality of epistemic systems. There is, however, no consensus on what epistemic systems actually are. Critics argue that epistemic relativism fails because its proponents cannot convincingly show the possibility of two mutually exclusive epistemic systems. Their accounts of epistemic systems are, however, highly idealized, conceptualizing them as sets of epistemic principles exclusively. But epistemic systems are necessarily inhabited by epistemic agents who negotiate these principles. Focusing on epistemic principles exclusively thus might abstract away too much from the actual dynamics within epistemic systems. Drawing from the sociology of scientific knowledge and the distinction between sociolect and idiolect in the philosophy of language, I aim to provide a richer account of epistemic systems and show that current arguments against epistemic relativism fail because they rest on an unrealistic conceptualization of epistemic systems.