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
    Statements
    321,452
    Perspectives
    108,905
    Topics
    42
    The old problem of vindicating scientific knowledge can b... — Carmelics
    Home/Skepticism
    HistoryEditSee Inverse

    The old problem of vindicating scientific knowledge can be rejected

    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 shows that justification of science is internal to science itself, not grounded in a priori first philosophy.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.If epistemology is continuous with empirical inquiry, the demand for an external vindication of science rests on a category error.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reason for 2 of 2
    ?
    • 1.Wittgenstein's 'On Certainty' demonstrates that foundational propositions like those underwriting science function as hinges, not hypotheses requiring external vindication.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.Hinge propositions are not justified by a priori reasoning but are constitutive of rational practice itself, making the traditional vindicatory project misconceived.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reasons Against

    1 perspective
    Reason against
    ?
    • 1.The old problem of vindicating scientific knowledge presupposes that one can vindicate scientific and other knowledge on the basis of propositions that are knowable a priori
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.That presupposition is false
      ?

      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.

    Related

    Hinge propositions are not justified by a priori reasoning but are constitutive ...If epistemology is continuous with empirical inquiry, the demand for an external...Quine's naturalized epistemology shows that justification of science is internal...That presupposition is false
    +2 moreShow less
    The old problem of vindicating scientific knowledge presupposes that one can vin...Wittgenstein's 'On Certainty' demonstrates that foundational propositions like t...

    Similar

    The old problem of vindicating scientific knowledge presupposes that o...86%This view about the necessary or contingent nature of scientific knowl...77%Aristotle's view that scientific knowledge consists of necessary truth...76%The most troubling source of skepticism arises from the scientific und...76%

    Source

    AI-extracted1/3 agreementValid
    SEP: moral-epistemology
    View source passageHide passage
    Two kinds of replies to this objection are worth considering. The first, suggested in the brief statement of Quine’s new methodology, is to reject the old problem as based on the false presupposition that one can vindicate scientific and other knowledge on the basis of propositions that are knowable a priori. The difficulty with this response is that it raises the difficult issues of whether a priori knowledge is possible and whether we can determine an answer to that question a posteriori. Anot
    Extraction notes

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

    Details

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