WHEN EXTERNALISM AND PRIVILEGED SELF-KNOWLEDGE ARE COMPATIBLE AND WHEN THEY ARE NOT

This paper is dedicated to the incompatibilist debate between externalism and privileged self-knowledge, such as it appears in the literature under two privileged contexts of discussion: the slowswitching cases and the reductio ad absurdum arguments. My aim is to defend a compatibilist position although recognising some exceptions to it. I will defend, on the one hand, that the incompatibilism reached by slow-switching cases is sustained only in case we maintain a specific but problematical view about self-knowledge. On the other hand, the incompatibilism reached by reductio ad absurdum arguments is only sustained if we maintain a narrow conception of externalism