Skip to content
Carmelics
TopicsThinkersChangesContributorsLoading account…

    Carmelics

    A reasoning platform. Break down any belief into clear reasons, explore both sides, and weigh the evidence honestly.

    Navigate

    • Topics
    • Search
    • Recent Changes
    • Contribute
    • How It Works
    • Glossary
    • Thinkers
    • Contributors
    • About
    • Statistics
    • Terms
    • Privacy

    Database

    Statements
    —
    Perspectives
    —
    Topics
    —

    Press ? for keyboard shortcuts

    LoyalLoyalJusticeJustice
    Made withinDC&Austin
    Epistemologists should renounce the project of explaining... — Carmelics
    Statements
    321,452
    Perspectives
    108,905
    Topics
    42
    Home/Skepticism
    HistoryEditSee Inverse

    Epistemologists should renounce the project of explaining knowledge a priori and independently of science

    Skepticism
    ?Rate how convincing each reason is below to see the overall strength.
    1 reason for
    2 reasons against

    Reasons For

    1 perspective
    Reason for
    ?
    • 1.Reasoning independently of all empirical assumptions is impossible
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.The most troubling source of skepticism arises from the scientific understanding of how perception works and should therefore be resolved by science itself
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reasons Against

    2 perspectives
    Reason against 1 of 2
    ?
    • 1.Science itself presupposes logical and mathematical truths that cannot be validated empirically without circularity.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.A priori epistemology grounds the normative standards by which scientific reasoning is evaluated as reliable or unreliable.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.Abandoning a priori justification collapses the distinction between good and bad inference, undermining science itself.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reason against 2 of 2
    ?
    • 1.Kant demonstrated that synthetic a priori knowledge—such as causal necessity—structures experience rather than being derived from it.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.P2 commits a genetic fallacy: the causal origin of a belief in perceptual mechanisms is distinct from its epistemic justification.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.Science can explain how we form beliefs without thereby supplying the normative criteria for when those beliefs constitute knowledge.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Sign in or register to share your perspective on this statement.

    Next step

    Based on where you are in your exploration

    Strongest counterpoint
    Explore the most compelling reason on the other side.

    Topics

    SkepticismTruth & Knowledge

    Key Terms

    knowledge(Distinguished from mere true belief, which may be the product of indoctrination and need not exercise deliberative capacities.)
    Justified true belief — true belief that has been arrived at through the exercise of deliberative capacities, including comparison of and deliberation among alternatives.

    Connections

    1 topic

    Perception1 linked

    Related

    A priori epistemology grounds the normative standards by which scientific reason...Abandoning a priori justification collapses the distinction between good and bad...Kant demonstrated that synthetic a priori knowledge—such as causal necessity—str...P2 commits a genetic fallacy: the causal origin of a belief in perceptual mechan...
    +4 moreShow less
    Reasoning independently of all empirical assumptions is impossibleScience can explain how we form beliefs without thereby supplying the normative ...

    Similar

    The project to explain science from within science could defeat itself79%The old problem of vindicating scientific knowledge presupposes that o...77%Williamson rejects the project of analyzing knowledge.77%Some explanations exceed mere brute-fact postulates without achieving ...76%

    Source

    AI-extracted1/3 agreementValid
    SEP: moral-epistemology
    View source passageHide passage
    What is this new methodology? Quine, who introduced naturalized epistemology five decades ago (Quine 1969a), urges epistemologists to renounce the project of explaining knowledge a priori, from first principles, thus independently of science. The traditional approach to knowledge had been to reason about the possibility of knowledge and about the kinds of things that can be known without assuming from the outset that we already possess considerable knowledge through science. Even the classical e
    Extraction notes

    Validity: Extracted via Max plan + API grounding/validity checks

    Details

    Science itself presupposes logical and mathematical truths that cannot be valida...
    The most troubling source of skepticism arises from the scientific understanding...
    Type
    claim
    Perspectives
    3 (1 for, 2 against)
    Edits
    1 edit