The phrase "attribute knowledge" is correct and usable in written English.
It can be used when discussing the assignment or recognition of knowledge to a person, source, or entity.
Example: "In academic writing, it is essential to attribute knowledge to the original authors to give them proper credit."
Alternatives: "assign knowledge" or "credit knowledge".
Fictitious play does not attribute knowledge of other people's payoffs or their rationality.
However, an epistemologist can revive the charge of self-defeat by showing that assertion does indeed require the speaker to attribute knowledge to himself.
Davidson himself, under the influence of Quine's behaviourism (Quine 1960; see Davidson 1976 , 1986 , 1990 is reluctant to attribute knowledge, tacit or otherwise, to speakers or their interpreters.
According to (speaker-centered) contextualists, whether it is correct for a judge to attribute knowledge to someone depends on that judge's context, and the standards for knowledge differ from context to context.
It is true that a recent experimental philosophy study found that lay people do attribute knowledge to protagonists in fake-barn cases, although they are less inclined to do so than in unproblematic cases of knowledge (Colaco et al. 2014).
Although participants rated true beliefs in Gettier and Skeptical Pressure cases as being justified, they were significantly less likely to attribute knowledge for these cases than for matched True Belief cases.
The question, Ryle might say, is not whether there are some "knowledge-how" attributions that actually attribute knowledge-that.
And now we have an argument for EC: attributing knowledge involves giving credit; credit attributions involve a kind of causal explanation; but causal explanations require a contextualist semantics; so knowledge attributions require a contextualist semantics too (2009, 107).
Yet attributing knowledge to animals is certainly in accord with our ordinary practice of using the word 'knowledge'knowledge
First, the idea that explaining language use involves attributing knowledge to speakers flouted the prevailing behaviorist view that talking about mental states was unscientific because mental states are unobservable.
That is, the Academic Skeptic claims that our ordinary knowledge claims are simply false because, even employing the lowest standards for attributing knowledge of any EI-proposition to S, because there can be no evidence, whatsoever, for the denial of sk, (and using CP*) there can be no evidence, whatsoever, for our EI-claims.
