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
    Naturalized epistemology begs the question against the gl... — Carmelics
    Statements
    321,452
    Perspectives
    108,905
    Topics
    42
    Home/Skepticism
    HistoryEditSee Inverse

    Naturalized epistemology begs the question against the global skeptic

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

    Reasons For

    2 perspectives
    Reason for 1 of 2
    ?
    • 1.Quine's naturalized epistemology explicitly abandons the project of first philosophy, accepting that epistemology must start from within our going theory of the world.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.Any framework for evaluating knowledge claims must presuppose some epistemic standards, making a fully neutral starting point logically impossible for any epistemological program.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.The global skeptic equally begs the question by presupposing the legitimacy of Cartesian standards of certainty that themselves require prior epistemic commitments to logical inference and conceptual clarity.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reason for 2 of 2
    ?
    • 1.Barry Stroud argues that naturalized epistemology dissolves rather than answers skepticism, changing the subject rather than engaging the traditional challenge on its own terms.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.A research program that redefines success conditions to exclude the very problem it faces commits the fallacy of definitional retreat, which is a structural form of question-begging identified by Hamblin in formal dialectic.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reasons Against

    1 perspective
    Reason against
    ?
    • 1.Naturalized epistemology operates within science
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.Operating within science assumes that we already have some knowledge
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.Assuming we already have some knowledge begs the question against the global skeptic, who denies that we have any 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

    Related

    A research program that redefines success conditions to exclude the very problem...Any framework for evaluating knowledge claims must presuppose some epistemic sta...Assuming we already have some knowledge begs the question against the global ske...Barry Stroud argues that naturalized epistemology dissolves rather than answers ...
    +4 moreShow less
    Naturalized epistemology operates within scienceOperating within science assumes that we already have some knowledgeQuine's naturalized epistemology explicitly abandons the project of first philos...The global skeptic equally begs the question by presupposing the legitimacy of C...

    Similar

    Assuming we already have some knowledge begs the question against the ...81%If all merely possible disagreements were epistemically significant, t...78%Global skepticism is an unacceptable epistemic outcome78%Radical skepticism is not a tenable epistemic position78%

    Source

    AI-extracted1/3 agreementValid
    SEP: moral-epistemology
    View source passageHide passage
    A second standard objection to naturalized epistemology is that it gives up the project of answering the global skeptic and as a consequence fails to address, much less resolve, a central issue in epistemology. It must surrender this project because by operating within science it assumes that we already have some knowledge and hence begs the question against the global skeptic. For example, Quine appeals to Darwin to explain why our native inductive tendencies (used say in tracking the location
    Extraction notes

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

    Details

    Type
    claim
    Perspectives
    3 (2 for, 1 against)
    Edits
    1 edit