Cognitive Relativism

The research of cognitive relativism is focused on conceptual scheme. Our cognitive judgement is relative to some conceptual scheme. Cognitive relativism is different from subjectivism, skepticism and contextualism. Subjectivism's standard is cognitive subject whose range is wider than cognitive relativism. Conceptual scheme exist not in individual but in a group. Skepticism deny the existence of truth while cognitive relativism take a pragmatic point of view. Truth have tool value, cognitive relativism reserve on the cognitive value of truth. Compare to contextualisms's dynamic standard, cognitive relativism's conceptual scheme is a internal stable psychological mechanism.The development of cognitive relativism is influenced by each turn of philosophy. At the beginning of history of philosophy, Protagoras made the earliest type of cognitive relativism. During the ontology period, cognitive relativism is mixed with ontology relativism. Conceptual scheme become the core of cognitive relativism when epistemology turn take place. After the linguistic turn, cognitive relativism develops further from perspects of concept, proposition and justification. Accordingly, cognitive relativism can be classified as concept relativism, truth relativism and justification relativism. But a link lacks between these relativisms. For the systematization of cognitive relativism, a link is necessary.Cognitive relativism meets many challenges, mainly on self-contradiction, conceptual scheme and relative truth. Wether the idea of cognitive relativism can be applied to itself caused the problem of self-contradiction. The problems of concept scheme include pluralism and incommensurate problem. These problems are about the standards of classification, translation and evaluation. The study of these problems at last turn out to be contradictory problem. The problem of truth relativism is how to justify the legitimacy of relative truth. There are strong relative truth and weak relative truth.Cognitive relativism is the weak one. A proposition is true relative to one concept scheme, no truth value relative to another concept scheme. It shows that truth is limited and confined by conditions, which falls again into the problem of contradiction. I believe that the paradox criticism of cognitive relativism is based on traditional formal logic. But this criticism to some extent can still be attributed to the range of cognitive relativism. From the perspective of dialectics to examine the cognitive relativism can avoided paradox and circular reasoning, This will be a new way to research cognitive relativism.