David Bourget (Western Ontario)
David Chalmers (ANU, NYU)
Rafael De Clercq
Ezio Di Nucci
Jack Alan Reynolds
Learn more about PhilPapers
Synthese 138 (3):315 - 335 (2004)
The bias paradox emerges out of a tension between objectivism and relativism.If one rejects a certain the conception objectivity as absolute impartiality and value-neutrality (i.e., if all views are biased), how, then, can one hold that some epistemic perspectives are better than others? This is a problem that has been most explicitly dealt with in feminist epistemology, but it is not unique to feminist perspectives. In this paper, I wish to clearly lay out the nature of the paradox and the various attempts to avoid it. I also intend to show why it is a problem for any epistemological view that rejects absolute objectivity. Finally, I wish to briefly outline a possible solution to the paradox, a solution that requires recognizing that rationality necessarily requires both objective and subjective elements.
|Keywords||Philosophy Philosophy Epistemology Logic Metaphysics Philosophy of Language|
|Categories||categorize this paper)|
Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server
Configure custom proxy (use this if your affiliation does not provide a proxy)
|Through your library|
References found in this work BETA
No references found.
Citations of this work BETA
No citations found.
Similar books and articles
Erik J. Wielenberg (2001). The New Paradox of the Stone Revisited. Faith and Philosophy 18 (2):261-268.
Alexandra L. Shuford (2010). Feminist Epistemology and American Pragmatism: Dewey and Quine. Continuum.
Richard Otte (1985). Probabilistic Causality and Simpson's Paradox. Philosophy of Science 52 (1):110-125.
Jeff Snapper (2012). The Liar Paradox in New Clothes. Analysis 72 (2):319-322.
Richard Kenneth Atkins (2011). This Proposition is Not True: C.S. Peirce and the Liar Paradox. Transactions of the Charles S. Peirce Society 47 (4):421-444.
Roger Clarke (2010). “The Ravens Paradox” is a Misnomer. Synthese 175 (3):427-440.
Daniel Hicks (2011). Is Longino's Conception of Objectivity Feminist? Hypatia 26 (2):333-351.
Leif Eriksen (1989). Confirmation, Paradox, and Logic. Philosophy of Science 56 (4):681-687.
Kristina Rolin (2006). The Bias Paradox in Feminist Standpoint Epistemology. Episteme 3 (1-2):125-136.
Added to index2009-01-28
Total downloads47 ( #85,419 of 1,789,925 )
Recent downloads (6 months)3 ( #263,819 of 1,789,925 )
How can I increase my downloads?