International Studies in the Philosophy of Science 22 (1):21 – 38 (2008)
In this essay, I respond to Tim Lewens's proposal that realists and Strong Programme theorists can find common ground in reliabilism. I agree with Lewens, but point to difficulties in his argument. Chief among these is his assumption that reliabilism is incompatible with the Strong Programme's principle of symmetry. I argue that the two are, in fact, compatible, and that Lewens misses this fact because he wrongly supposes that reliabilism entails naturalism. The Strong Programme can fully accommodate a reliabilism which has been freed from its inessential ties to naturalism. Unlike naturalistic epistemologists, the Strong Programme's sociologistic reliabilist insists that all scientific facts are the product of both natural and social causal phenomena. Anticipating objections, I draw on Wittgenstein's rule-following considerations to explain how the sociologistic reliabilist can account for standard intuitions about the objective elements of knowledge. I also explain how the Strong Programme theorist can distinguish between a belief's seeming reliable and its being reliable. Ich setzte den Fu in die Luft, und sie trug. (Hilde Domin).
|Keywords||No keywords specified (fix it)|
|Categories||categorize this paper)|
References found in this work BETA
Leviathan and the Air-Pump: Hobbes, Boyle, and the Experimental Life.Steven Shapin & Simon Schaffer - 1989 - Princeton University Press.
Citations of this work BETA
State of the Field: Are the Results of Science Contingent or Inevitable?Katherina Kinzel - 2015 - Studies in History and Philosophy of Science Part A 52:55-66.
Objective Styles in Northern Field Science.Jeff Kochan - 2015 - Studies in History and Philosophy of Science Part A 52:1-12.
Sorites is No Threat to Modus Ponens: A Reply to Kochan.Colin Howson - 2009 - International Studies in the Philosophy of Science 23 (2):209-212.
The Exception Makes the Rule: Reply to Howson.Jeff Kochan - 2009 - International Studies in the Philosophy of Science 23 (2):213-216.
Similar books and articles
Bloor's Bluff: Behaviourism and the Strong Programme.Peter Slezak - 1991 - International Studies in the Philosophy of Science 5 (3):241 – 256.
A Critique of Relativism in the Sociology of Scientific Knowledge.Sun Si - 2007 - Frontiers of Philosophy in China 2 (1):115-130.
Levels of Reflexivity: Unnoted Differences Within the "Strong Programme" in the Sociology of Knowledge.Edward Manier - 1980 - PSA: Proceedings of the Biennial Meeting of the Philosophy of Science Association 1980:197-207.
Relativism and the Sociology of Mathematics: Remarks on Bloor, Flew, and Frege.Timm Triplett - 1986 - Inquiry 29 (1-4):439-450.
The Underdetermination of Theory by Data and the "Strong Programme" in the Sociology of Knowledge.Samir Okasha - 2000 - International Studies in the Philosophy of Science 14 (3):283 – 297.
Conventionalism, Scientific Discovery and the Sociology of Knowledge.Angelo M. Petroni - 1993 - International Studies in the Philosophy of Science 7 (3):225 – 240.
Toward a Monistic Theory of Science: The `Strong Programme' Reconsidered.Stephen Kemp - 2003 - Philosophy of the Social Sciences 33 (3):311-338.
Can Relativism Be Reconciled with Realism and Causalism?Barbara Tuchańska - 1990 - International Studies in the Philosophy of Science 4 (3):285-294.
Contrastive Explanation and the 'Strong Programme' in the Sociology of Scientific Knowledge.Jeff Kochan - 2010 - Social Studies of Science 40 (1):127-44.
Added to index2009-01-28
Total downloads118 ( #39,058 of 2,146,275 )
Recent downloads (6 months)2 ( #279,803 of 2,146,275 )
How can I increase my downloads?
There are no threads in this forum
Nothing in this forum yet.