David Bourget (Western Ontario)
David Chalmers (ANU, NYU)
Rafael De Clercq
Jack Alan Reynolds
Learn more about PhilPapers
Erkenntnis 76 (1):59-72 (2012)
This paper addresses the meta-epistemological dispute over the basis of epistemic evaluation from the standpoint of meliorative epistemology. Meliorative epistemology aims at guiding our epistemic practice to better results, and it comprises two levels of epistemic evaluation. At the social level (meliorative social epistemology) appropriate experts conduct evaluation for the community, so that epistemic evaluation is externalist since each epistemic subject in the community need not have access to the basis of the experts' evaluation. While at the personal level (meliorative personal epistemology) epistemic evaluation is internalist since each member of the community must evaluate the reliability of the (apparent) experts from the first-person perspective. I argue that evaluation at the social level should be the primary focus of meliorative epistemology since meliorative personal epistemology does not provide informative epistemic norms. It is then pointed out that epistemic evaluation at the social level can be considered internalist in the extended sense (social internalism) in that every component of the evaluation needs to be recognized by some members of the community at some points. As a result, some familiar problems of internalist epistemology, such as regress and circularity of epistemic support, carry over to meliorative social epistemology.
|Keywords||No keywords specified (fix it)|
|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
Daniel Kahneman, Paul Slovic & Amos Tversky (eds.) (1982). Judgment Under Uncertainty: Heuristics and Biases. Cambridge University Press.
Thomas Nagel (1986). The View From Nowhere. Oxford University Press.
Michael Bergmann (2006). Justification Without Awareness: A Defense of Epistemic Externalism. Oxford University Press.
Alvin Plantinga (1993). Warrant and Proper Function. Oxford University Press.
Citations of this work BETA
Gerhard Schurz (2008). Third-Person Internalism: A Critical Examination of Externalism and a Foundation-Oriented Alternative. [REVIEW] Acta Analytica 23 (1):9-28.
Similar books and articles
Duncan Pritchard & Jesper Kallestrup (2004). An Argument for the Inconsistency of Content Externalism and Epistemic Internalism. Philosophia 31 (3-4):345-354.
Sven Bernecker (2006). Prospects for Epistemic Compatibilism. Philosophical Studies 130 (1):81-104.
Gregory Wheeler & Luís Moniz Pereira (2008). Methodological Naturalism and Epistemic Internalism. Synthese 163 (3):315 - 328.
Christophe Heintz & Dario Taraborelli (2010). Editorial: Folk Epistemology. The Cognitive Bases of Epistemic Evaluation. Review of Philosophy and Psychology 1 (4):477-482.
Declan Smithies (forthcoming). Why Justification Matters. In David Henderson & John Greco (eds.), Epistemic Evaluation: Point and Purpose in Epistemology. Oxford University Press
John Greco (2012). A (Different) Virtue Epistemology. Philosophy and Phenomenological Research 85 (1):1-26.
B. J. C. Madison (2009). On the Compatibility of Epistemic Internalism and Content Externalism. Acta Analytica 24 (3):173-183.
B. J. C. Madison (2010). Epistemic Internalism. Philosophy Compass 5 (10):840-853.
Gerhard Schurz (2009). Meliorative Reliabilist Epistemology: Where Externalism and Internalism Meet. Grazer Philosophische Studien 79 (1):41-62.
Chris Calvert-Minor (2011). “Epistemological Communities” and the Problem of Epistemic Agency. Social Epistemology 25 (4):341 - 360.
Added to index2009-01-28
Total downloads23 ( #126,584 of 1,725,588 )
Recent downloads (6 months)4 ( #167,236 of 1,725,588 )
How can I increase my downloads?