As to the first question, there are precedents for the type of error that the contextualist says is going on with respect to at least some of our “knowledge” attributions. For example, by implicitly raising the standards—drawing attention to previously disregarded bumps, etc.—you can get a competent speaker to take seriously “flatness skepticism”, the view that nothing’s really flat (Cohen 1999, 78–79; 2004, 193; 2014, 73, 82–83). But this can take place only because,