This paper contends that attributor contextualism, as Keith DeRose advocates, fails to effectively address the challenges of scepticism. DeRose presents compelling approaches to addressing the sceptical problem. DeRose asserts that he has resolved the sceptical problem, going beyond merely addressing the concerns of sceptics. DeRose posits that contextualism has predominantly been formulated to address scepticism. To this end, this study examines how tenable DeRose responds to the sceptical challenge. The study is noteworthy as contextualism preserves the robustness and appeal of scepticism while asserting a resolution to the sceptical challenge. Ultimately, the study concludes that DeRose’s proposal falls short of providing a satisfying response to scepticism. Contextualism is self-defeating. Despite my assessment of DeRose’s attributor contextualism, I believe that it is commendable that DeRose has come up with some kind of explanation for the factors that contribute to such an inclination given that knowledge attribution might be contextual.

Keywords: contextualism, scepticism, knowledge attribution, attributor, DeRose.