Varieties of naturalized epistemology: Criticisms and alternatives
| Abstract | There is a widespread belief among intellectuals that the domain of philosophy shrinks as the domain of the special sciences expands, and that someday, science might swallow up philosophy entirely. Some philosophical naturalists think that this day may have already arrived. These naturalists believe that philosophy’s methodology should be the same as that of natural science; they imply that philosophy has no distinctive “armchair” methodology of its own. | |||||||||
| Keywords | No keywords specified (fix it) | |||||||||
| Categories | ||||||||||
| Options |
|
|||||||||
Download options| PhilPapers Archive |
Upload a copy of this paper Check publisher's policy on self-archival Papers currently archived: 5,875 |
| External links |
  Try with proxy. Try with proxy. |
| Through your library | Only published papers are available at libraries |
Similar books and articlesHarold I. Brown (1988). Normative Epistemology and Naturalized Epistemology. Inquiry 31 (1):53 – 78.
Harvey Siegel (1984). Empirical Psychology, Naturalized Epistemology, and First Philosophy. Philosophy of Science 51 (4):667-676.
James Maffie (1995). Naturalism, Scientism and the Independence of Epistemology. Erkenntnis 43 (1):1 - 27.
Hangqing Cong & Xiaodong Cheng (2006). Pragmatic Commitments to Naturalized Epistemology. Frontiers of Philosophy in China 1 (3):477-490.
Benjamin Bayer (2007). How Not to Refute Quine: Evaluating Kim's Alternatives to Naturalized Epistemology. Southern Journal of Philosophy 45 (4):473-495.
David Stump (1992). Naturalized Philosophy of Science with a Plurality of Methods. Philosophy of Science 59 (3):456-460.
Analytics
Monthly downloads |
Added to index2009-01-28Total downloads55 ( #18,769 of 556,888 )Recent downloads (6 months)3 ( #27,428 of 556,888 )How can I increase my downloads? |
My notes
Discussion
