About this topic
Summary The project of naturalized epistemology is that of identifying a substantial and constructive role for the sciences in epistemological theorizing. One popular way to think about the continuity between the sciences and epistemology is in terms of how normative questions about how we ought to form our beliefs cannot be answered independently of descriptive questions about how we do form beliefs. Understood thus, the challenge for the naturalized epistemologist is to spell out in more detail the respective contribution by (traditional) epistemology and the sciences, and in particular the extent to which the latter is to replace or simply complement the former.
Key works The contemporary discussion regarding naturalized epistemology goes back to Quine 1969. For discussions of Quine, see Foley 1994Kim 1988, and Stich 1993. Major contributions to the project of naturalizing epistemology can be found in Goldman 1986Goldman 1992, Kornblith 2002, and Bishop & Trout 2005. For a helpful anthology, see Kornblith 1985.
Introductions Kornblith 1985 is a helpful collection of essays on naturalized epistemology. For a more recent overview of developments since Quine 1969, see Kornblith 2007.
Related categories

433 found
1 — 50 / 433
  1. Epistemology and the Psychology of Human Judgment.Michael A. Bishop & J. D. Trout - 2004 - Oxford University Press USA.
    Bishop and Trout here present a unique and provocative new approach to epistemology, which aims to liberate it from the scholastic debates of standard analytic epistemology, and to treat it as a branch of the philosophy of science.
  2. Exercises in Naturalistic Epistemology.Jonathan E. Adler - 1987 - Behaviorism 15 (2):161-164.
  3. Epistemology and Empirical Investigation.Kristoffer Ahlstrom - 2008 - Grazer Philosophische Studien 76 (1):109-134.
    Recently, Hilary Kornblith has argued that epistemological investigation is substantially empirical. In the present paper, I will first show that his claim is not contingent upon the further and, admittedly, controversial assumption that all objects of epistemological investigation are natural kinds. Then, I will argue that, contrary to what Kornblith seems to assume, this methodological contention does not imply that there is no need for attending to our epistemic concepts in epistemology. Understanding the make-up of our concepts and, in particular, (...)
  4. The Epistemology of Inclusiveness.Kristoffer Ahlstrom-Vij, Klemens Kappel & Nikolaj Jang Lee Linding Pedersen - 2013 - Synthese 190 (7):1185-1188.
  5. Permissibility of the Use of Empirical Sciences in Epistemology.Rezā Akbari - unknown - Kheradnameh Sadra Quarterly 42.
    The traditional approaches to epistemology are task-oriented and enjoy prescriptive aspects. They do not allow the employment of empirical sciences in epistemology. This is because they believe that such sciences lack any kind of prescriptive aspect and enjoy a descriptive nature. Some contemporary epistemological theoreticians, such as realist naturalists, believe that we have no choice but to employ empirical sciences in epistemology, for they provide us with a more accurate understanding of concepts such as justification and knowledge. It appears that (...)
  6. Epistemology.Nicholas Unwin Alan Millar - 2005 - Philosophical Books 46 (2):167-170.
  7. A Framework For Understanding Naturalized Epistemology.Amirah A. M. A. Albahri - unknown
    When reviewing the literature of epistemology, we find that very few papers discuss the topic of naturalized epistemology as a unified domain. The field of naturalized epistemology does not get the attention it deserves. Therefore, my main aim in this dissertation is to establish a framework and criterion that enables us to define, explain, and classify theories of naturalized epistemology in order to present naturalized epistemology as a well-organized and unified domain. In addition, I aim to select and argue in (...)
  8. Epistemic Aims and Values in W.V. Quine's Naturalized Epistemology.Javier Rodriguez Alcazar - 1993 - Philosophical Issues 3:309-318.
  9. What Was Epistemology?Barry Allen - 2000 - In Robert Brandom (ed.), Rorty and His Critics. Blackwell.
  10. Carnap and Quine on Empiricism.Robert Almeder - 1997 - History of Philosophy Quarterly 14 (3):349 - 364.
    In this paper I discuss the naturalism of Carnap and Quine. I examine Quine's naturalized epistemology and argue that Carnap's naturalism is considerably more attractive.
  11. Defining Justification and Naturalizing Epistemology.Robert Almeder - 1994 - Philosophy and Phenomenological Research 54 (3):669 - 681.
  12. On Naturalizing Epistemology.Robert Almeder - 1990 - American Philosophical Quarterly 27 (4):263 - 279.
  13. Defining Justification and Naturalizing Epistemology.Robert-F. Almeder - 1994 - Philosophy and Phenomenological Research 54:669-681.
    In this paper I examine the claim that no theory of\nepistemic justification is possible because whatever\ndefinition one gives admits of the question "Are you\njustified in accepting your definition of justification?"\nwhich cannot be answered without begging the question in\nfavor of the original definition offered. I examine various\nreplies to the argument and then argue that the question\nneed not be answered.
  14. The Epistemological Status of a Naturalized Epistemology.Ron Amundson - 1983 - Inquiry: An Interdisciplinary Journal of Philosophy 26 (3):333 – 344.
    Philosophically inclined psychologists and psychologically inclined philosophers often hold that the substantive discoveries of psychology can provide an empirical foundation for epistemology. In this paper it is argued that the ambition to found epistemology empirically faces certain unnoticed difficulties. Empirical theories concerned with knowledge?gaining abilities have been historically associated with specific epistemological views such that the epistemology gives preferential support to the substantive theory, while the theory empirically supports the epistemology. Theories attribute to the subject just those epistemic abilities which (...)
  15. Feminist Epistemology: An Interpretation and a Defense.Elizabeth Anderson - 1995 - Hypatia 10 (3):50 - 84.
    Feminist epistemology has often been understood as the study of feminine "ways of knowing." But feminist epistemology is better understood as the branch of naturalized, social epistemology that studies the various influences of norms and conceptions of gender and gendered interests and experiences on the production of knowledge. This understanding avoids dubious claims about feminine cognitive differences and enables feminist research in various disciplines to pose deep internal critiques of mainstream research.
  16. Naturalism and the Scientific Status of the Social Sciences.Daniel Andler - 2009 - In M. Dorato M. Suàrez (ed.), Epsa Epistemology and Methodology of Science. Springer. pp. 1--12.
    situation in the sciences of man and show it to be fallacious. On the view to be 6 rejected, the sciences of man are undergoing the first serious attempt in history to 7 thoroughly naturalize their subject matter and thus to put an end to their separate sta- 8 tus. Progress has (on this view) been quite considerable in the disciplines in charge 9 of the individual, while in the social sciences the outcome of the process is moot: 10 the (...)
  17. Epistemology Naturalized.David B. Annis - 1982 - Metaphilosophy 13 (3-4):201-208.
  18. Naturalized Epistemology and the Study of Language in Naturalistic Epistemology: A Symposium of Two Decades.Lm Antony - 1987 - Boston Studies in the Philosophy of Science 100:235-257.
  19. A Naturalized Approach to the a Priori.Louise Antony - 2004 - Philosophical Issues 14 (1):1–17.
  20. Naturalized Epistemology, Morality, and the Real World.Louise Antony - 2000 - Canadian Journal of Philosophy 30 (Supplement):103-137.
  21. Impractical Naturalism.Charles Kirby Arinder - 2005 - Dissertation, University of Virginia
    This dissertation is about naturalism; in it, I take the position that naturalism is the practice of accepting only public empirical evidence, and that that practice is untenable. The dissertation is divided into three chapters. In the first chapter, I review the literature on naturalism and conclude that most accounts of it must be incorrect; in that chapter, I also argue for my account of naturalism. The second chapter examines versions of naturalized epistemology and philosophy of science which wish to (...)
  22. A Naturalist Program: Epistemology and Ontology.D. M. Armstrong - 1999 - Proceedings and Addresses of the American Philosophical Association 73 (2):77 - 89.
  23. Is Quine Naturalistic Epistemology Plausible.P. Artuso - 1989 - Filosofia 40 (3):255-279.
  24. Knowledge, Justification, and the Normativity of Epistemology.Robert Audi - 2013 - Res Philosophica 90 (2):127-145.
    Epistemology is sometimes said to be a normative discipline, but what this characterization means is often left unclear. This paper distinguishes two kindsof normativity and thereby provides a new way of understanding attributions of normativity. Associated with this distinction are two kinds of epistemological reflection. These are shown to be parallel to two kinds of ethical reflection. In the light of what emerges in showing these points, the paper clarifies the requirements for naturalizing epistemology, the place normativity might have, given (...)
  25. Philosophical Naturalism at the Turn of the Century.Robert Audi - 2000 - Journal of Philosophical Research 25:27-45.
    This paper examines the nature and varieties of philosophical naturalism. A central question it pursues is whether there is any unifying conception of naturalism and, if so, whether it is substantive or methodological. Another question addressed is the extent to which naturalism is motivated by or depends on empiricism. The paper explores the connection between naturalism and scientific method---often taken as central in defining it---and critically discusses naturalistic positions in metaphysics (including philosophical theology), epistemology, and ethics. Given the ambitions of (...)
  26. "Epistemology and Cognition" by Alvin I. Goldman. [REVIEW]Robert Audi - 1989 - Philosophy and Phenomenological Research 49 (4):733.
    This book is a massive study of epistemology and its connections with cognitive psychology, philosophy of mind, metaphysics, and philosophy of science. Its aim is to redirect the field of epistemology, which “should be a multidisciplinary affair, not the province of pure, a priori philosophy.”.
  27. Do Unconscious Beliefs Yield Knowledge?Luis M. Augusto - 2009 - Revista Filosófica de Coimbra 18 (35):161-184.
    This paper defends the view that a correct analysis of knowledge must take empirical data into consideration. The data here provided is from experimental psychology, namely from phenomena involving unconscious cognition.
  28. On Mark McEvoy's “Should Analytic Epistemology Be Replaced by Ameliorative Psychology?”.Randall E. Auxier - 2007 - Southwest Philosophy Review 23 (2):47-49.
  29. Epistemological Naturalism, Skeptical Threat and the Question of Normativity in Post-Apocalyptic Times.M. Baç - 2007 - Filozofia 62:590-600.
    My aim in this paper is to critically deal with two issues confronting naturalist philosophers who want to steer a middle course between radical naturalism and total a-priorism in epistemology. These issues are the role of a priori in ordinary human knowledge, and who succeeds and who fails in properly dealing with the skeptical challenge. I focus on the views of P. Kitcher and L. BonJour with an aim to display the strengths and weaknesses of the naturalist perspective. My conclusion (...)
  30. The a to Z of Epistemology.Ralph Baergen - 2010 - Scarecrow Press.
    The A to Z of Epistemology provides an overview of this field of study and of the theories, concepts, and personalities through the use of a chronology, an introductory essay, a bibliography, and more than 500 cross-referenced dictionary entries, covering notable concepts, theories, arguments, publications, issues, and philosophers. Students and others who wish to acquaint themselves with epistemology will be greatly aided by this reference.
  31. Part IV Must Science Validate All Knowledge?Lynne Rudder Baker - 2003 - In A. J. Sanford & P. N. Johnson-Laird (eds.), The Nature and Limits of Human Understanding. T & T Clark.
  32. Panentheizing Epistemology.Mark Bandas - 1992 - Semiotics:83-90.
  33. Is Naturalized Epistemology Experientially Vacuous?Michael G. Barnhart - 1996 - Philosophy in the Contemporary World 3 (2):1-5.
    By naturalized epistemology, I mean those views expressed by Nozick and Margolis among others who favor an evolutionary account of human rationality as an adaptive mechanism which is unlikely to provide the means for its own legitimation and therefore unlikely to produce a single set of rules or norms which are certifiably rational. Analyzing the likely relativism that stems from such a view, namely that there could be divergent standards of rationality under different historical or environmental conditions, I conclude that (...)
  34. Reflective Equilibrium and Underdetermination in Epistemology.Jared Bates - 2004 - Acta Analytica 19 (32):45-64.
    The basic aim of Alvin Goldman’s approach to epistemology, and the tradition it represents, is naturalistic; that is, epistemological theories in this tradition aim to identify the naturalistic, nonnormative criteria on which justified belief supervenes (Goldman, 1986; Markie, 1997). The basic method of Goldman’s epistemology, and the tradition it represents, is the reflective equilibrium test; that is, epistemological theories in this tradition are tested against our intuitions about cases of justified and unjustified belief (Goldman, 1986; Markie, 1997). I will argue (...)
  35. How Not to Refute Quine: Evaluating Kim's Alternatives to Naturalized Epistemology.Benjamin Bayer - 2007 - Southern Journal of Philosophy 45 (4):473-495.
    This paper offers an interpretation of Quine’s naturalized epistemology through the lens of Jaegwon Kim’s influential critique of the same. Kim argues that Quine forces a false choice between traditional deductivist foundationalism and naturalized epistemology and contends that there are viable alternative epistemological projects. However it is suggested that Quine would reject these alternatives by reference to the same fundamental principles (underdetermination, indeterminacy of translation, extensionalism) that led him to reject traditional epistemology and propose naturalism as an alternative. Given this (...)
  36. Varieties of Naturalized Epistemology: Criticisms and Alternatives.Benjamin Bayer - 2007 - Dissertation, University of Illinois
    “Naturalized epistemology” is a recent attempt to transform the theory of knowledge into a branch of natural science. Traditional epistemologists object to this proposal on the grounds that it eliminates the distinctively philosophical content of epistemology. In this thesis, I argue that traditional philosophers are justified in their reluctance to accept naturalism, but that their ongoing inability to refute it points to deeper problems inherent in traditional epistemology. I establish my thesis first by critiquing three versions of naturalism, showing that (...)
  37. Va Savoir! De la Connaissance En Général -- Pascal Engel. [REVIEW]Guillaume Beaulac & Pierre Poirier - 2009 - Dialogue 48 (1):217-221.
  38. The Quinean Quandary and the Indispensability of Nonnaturalized Epistemology.Alan Berger - 2003 - Philosophical Forum 34 (3-4):367–382.
  39. Quine and the A Priori.Lars Bergström - 2014 - In Gilbert Harman & Ernie Lepore (eds.), A Companion to W. V. O. Quine. Wiley-Blackwell. pp. 38–53.
  40. A Defense of Quinean Naturalism.Lars Bergström - 2008 - In Chase B. Wrenn (ed.), Naturalism, Reference, and Ontology. Peter Lang Publishing Group.
  41. Quine's Relativism.Lars Bergström - 2006 - Theoria 72 (4):286-298.
  42. Underdetermination of Physical Theory.Lars Bergström - 2004 - In Roger F. Gibson (ed.), The Cambridge Companion to Quine. Cambridge University Press. pp. 91--114.
  43. Knowledge, Naturalism, and Cognitive Ethology: Kornblith’s Knowledge and its Place in Nature.José Luis Bermúdez - 2006 - Philosophical Studies 127 (2):299-316.
    This paper explores Kornblith's proposal in "Knowledge and its Place in Nature" that knowledge is a natural kind that can be elucidated and understood in scientific terms. Central to Kornblith's development of this proposal is the claim that there is a single category of unreflective knowledge that is studied by cognitive ethologists and is the proper province of epistemology. This claim is challenged on the grounds that even unreflective knowledge in language-using humans reflects forms of logical reasoning that are in (...)
  44. Epistemology of Swaminarayan.Svvami Bhaktavatsaldas - 1981 - In Sahajānanda (ed.), New Dimensions in Vedanta Philosophy. Bochasanwasi Shri Aksharpurushottam Sanstha. pp. 1--176.
  45. Gnosiology: The Scientific Approach to the Theory of Knowledge.G. Bidwell & C. Pinder (eds.) - 1949/1966 - Pergamon Press.
  46. Reflections on Cognitive and Epistemic Diversity : Can a Stich in Time Save Quine?Michael Bishop - 2009 - In Dominic Murphy & Michael A. Bishop (eds.), Stich and His Critics. Wiley-Blackwell.
    In “Epistemology Naturalized”, Quine famously suggests that epistemology, properly understood, “simply falls into place as a chapter of psychology and hence of natural science” (1969, 82). Since the appearance of Quine’s seminal article, virtually every epistemologist, including the later Quine (1986, 664), has repudiated the idea that a normative discipline like epistemology could be reduced to a purely descriptive discipline like psychology. Working epistemologists no longer take Quine’s vision in “Epistemology Naturalized” seriously. In this paper, I will explain why I (...)
  47. In Praise of Epistemic Irresponsibility: How Lazy and Ignorant Can You Be?Michael Bishop - 2000 - Synthese 122 (1):179-208.
    Epistemic responsibility involves at least two central ideas. To be epistemically responsible is to display the virtue epistemic internalists take to be central to justification. In normal circumstances and in the long run, epistemic responsibility is strongly positively correlated with reliability. Sections 1 and 2 review evidence showing that for a wide range of real-world problems, the most reliable, tractable reasoning strategies audaciously flout the internalist's epistemic virtues. In Section 3, I argue that these results force us to give up (...)
  48. Naturalizing the Philosophy of Science.Michael A. Bishop - 1990 - Dissertation, University of California, San Diego
    Normative apriorist philosophers of science build purely normative a priori reconstructions of science, whereas descriptive naturalists eliminate the normative elements of the philosophy of science in favor of purely descriptive endeavors. I hope to exhibit the virtues of an alternative approach that appreciates both the normative and the natural in the philosophy of science. ;Theory ladenness. Some philosophers claim that a plausible view about how our visual systems work either undermines or facilitates our ability to rationally adjudicate between competing theories (...)
  49. Epistemology and the Psychology of Human Judgment.Michael A. Bishop & J. D. Trout - 2005 - Oup Usa.
    Bishop and Trout here present a unique and provocative new approach to epistemology (the theory of human knowledge and reasoning). Their approach aims to liberate epistemology from the scholastic debates of standard analytic epistemology, and treat it as a branch of the philosophy of science. The approach is novel in its use of cost-benefit analysis to guide people facing real reasoning problems and in its framework for resolving normative disputes in psychology. Based on empirical data, Bishop and Trout show how (...)
  50. The Pathologies of Standard Analytic Epistemology.Michael Bishop & J. D. Trout - 2005 - Noûs 39 (4):696-714.
    Standard Analytic Epistemology (SAE) names a contingently clustered class of methods and theses that have dominated English-speaking epistemology for about the past half-century. The major contemporary theories of SAE include versions of foundationalism (Chisholm 1981, Pollock 1974), coherentism (Bonjour 1985, Lehrer 1974), reliabilism (Dretske 1981, Goldman 1986) and contextualism (DeRose 1995, Lewis 1996). While proponents of SAE don’t agree about how to define naturalized epistemology, most agree that a thoroughgoing naturalism in epistemology can’t work. For the purposes of this paper, (...)
1 — 50 / 433