34 found
Order:
  1. Epistemic Relativism. A Constructive Critique.Markus Seidel - 2014 - Houndsmills, Basingstoke: Palgrave-Macmillan.
    Are our beliefs justified only relatively to a specific culture or society? Is it possible to give reasons for the superiority of our scientific, epistemic methods? Markus Seidel sets out to answer these questions in his critique of epistemic relativism. Focusing on the work of the most prominent, explicitly relativist position in the sociology of scientific knowledge – so-called 'Edinburgh relativism' or the 'Strong Programme' –, he scrutinizes the key arguments for epistemic relativism from a philosophical perspective: underdetermination and norm-circularity. (...)
    Direct download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   22 citations  
  2. Throwing the Baby Out with the Water: From Reasonably Scrutinizing Authorities to Rampant Scepticism About Expertise.Markus Seidel - 2014 - Informal Logic 34 (2):192-218.
    In this paper, I argue that many arguments from expert opinion are strong arguments. Therefore, in many cases it is rational to rely on experts since in many cases the fact that an expert says that p makes it highly likely that p is true. I will defend this claim by providing 5 arguments that illuminate and elaborate on 5 crucial claims about expertise. In this way, I aim to undermine recent attempts to establish a rampant scepticism about arguments from (...)
    Direct download (4 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   19 citations  
  3. Relativism or Relationism? A Mannheimian Interpretation of Fleck’s Claims About Relativism.Markus Seidel - 2011 - Journal for General Philosophy of Science / Zeitschrift für Allgemeine Wissenschaftstheorie 42 (2):219-240.
    The paper explores the defence by the early sociologist of science Ludwik Fleck against the charge of relativism. It is shown that there are crucial and hitherto unnoticed similarities between Fleck’s strategy and the attempt by his contemporary Karl Mannheim to distinguish between an incoherent relativism and a consistent relationism. Both authors seek to revise epistemology fundamentally by reinterpreting the concept of objectivity in two ways: as inner- and inter-style objectivity. The argument for the latter concept shows the genuine political (...)
    Direct download (5 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   14 citations  
  4.  65
    Why the epistemic relativist cannot use the sceptic’s strategy. A comment on Sankey.Markus Seidel - 2013 - Studies in History and Philosophy of Science Part A 44 (1):134-139.
    In two recent papers in Studies in History and Philosophy of Science Howard Sankey has argued that there is an intimate relationship between Pyrrhonian skepticism and recent approaches to epistemic relativism.Though the general argument and idea of Sankey’s papers is very much appreciated, it is argued that the epistemic relativist’s recourse to the skeptical strategy outlined by the Pyrrhonian is not a good one. This diagnosis gives rise to an objection against the epistemic relativist who argues on the basis of (...)
    Direct download (3 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   7 citations  
  5.  69
    The Real Struggle: An Objective Notion of Expertise?Markus Seidel - 2016 - Informal Logic 36 (2):253-264.
    In a paper published in this journal Martin Hinton aims to show that the struggle between Moti Mizrahi and me about whether arguments from expert opinion are weak arguments rests on misunderstandings (Hinton 2015). Let me emphasize that I generally appreciate Hinton’s intention to settle the dispute between Mizrahi and myself in this way. 1 Furthermore, I also agree with Hinton’s conclusion that if Mizrahi is interpreted in the way Hinton does, then Mizrahi’s “claim becomes far less controversial, but also (...)
    Direct download (5 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   5 citations  
  6.  57
    Introduction.Markus Seidel & Richard Schantz - 2011 - In Richard Schantz & Markus Seidel (eds.), The Problem of Relativism in the Sociology of (Scientific) Knowledge. Lancaster, LA1: ontos. pp. 11-22.
  7. Kuhn’s two accounts of rational disagreement in science: an interpretation and critique.Markus Seidel - 2019 - Synthese 198 (Suppl 25):6023-6051.
    Whereas there is much discussion about Thomas Kuhn’s notion of methodological incommensurability and many have seen his ideas as an attempt to allow for rational disagreement in science, so far no serious analysis of how exactly Kuhn aims to account for rational disagreement has been proposed. This paper provides the first in-depth analysis of Kuhn’s account of rational disagreement in science—an account that can be seen as the most prominent attempt to allow for rational disagreement in science. Three things will (...)
    Direct download (3 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   2 citations  
  8. Karl Mannheim, Relativism and Knowledge in the Natural Sciences – A Deviant Interpretation.Markus Seidel - 2011 - In Richard Schantz & Markus Seidel (eds.), The Problem of Relativism in the Sociology of (Scientific) Knowledge. Lancaster, LA1: ontos. pp. 183-214.
    The paper focuses on one central aspect of Karl Mannheim’s sociology of knowledge: his exemption of the contents of mathematics and the natural sciences from sociological investigations. After emphasizing the importance of Mannheim’s contribution and his exemption-thesis to the history and development of the field and the problem of relativism, I survey several interpretations of the thesis – especially those put forward by proponents of the so-called ‘Strong Programme’. I argue that these interpretations do not get the philosophical background and (...)
    Direct download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   6 citations  
  9. The Problem of Relativism in the Sociology of (Scientific) Knowledge.Richard Schantz & Markus Seidel (eds.) - 2011 - Lancaster, LA1: ontos.
    This volume comprises original articles by leading authors – from philosophy as well as sociology – in the debate around relativism in the sociology of (scientific) knowledge. Its aim has been to bring together several threads from the relevant disciplines and to cover the discussion from historical and systematic points of view. Among the contributors are Maria Baghramian, Barry Barnes, Martin Endreß, Hubert Knoblauch, Richard Schantz and Harvey Siegel.
    Direct download (4 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   4 citations  
  10.  57
    Scylla and Charybdis of the epistemic relativist: Why the epistemic relativist still cannot use the sceptic’s strategy.Markus Seidel - 2013 - Studies in History and Philosophy of Science Part A 44 (1):145-149.
    In a reply to Howard Sankey I have maintained that the epistemic relativist cannot use the strategy of the sceptic since the relativist is at pains not to draw the sceptical solution. Sankey has objected to my argument by distinguishing between weak and strong justification: according to Sankey, the relativist using the sceptic’s strategy aims to provide an argument against the latter form of justification but still maintains that we can have the former.In this counter-response I argue that if this (...)
    Direct download (3 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   4 citations  
  11.  93
    Introduction: The Philosophy of Expertise—What is Expertise?Christian Quast & Markus Seidel - 2018 - Topoi 37 (1):1-2.
    In this paper I will introduce a practical explication for the notion of expertise. At first, I motivate this attempt by taking a look on recent debates which display great disagreement about whether and how to define expertise in the first place. After that I will introduce the methodology of practical explications in the spirit of Edward Craig’s Knowledge and the state of nature along with some conditions of adequacy taken from ordinary and scientific language. This eventually culminates in the (...)
    Direct download (4 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   2 citations  
  12.  67
    Ein Plädoyer wider die Annahme einer fundamentalen Unterscheidung von Genese und Geltung in der Erkenntnistheorie.Markus Seidel - 2023 - Zeitschrift für Philosophische Forschung 77 (4):454-483.
    Many epistemologists believe that the distinction between the genesis and the validity of a belief is a fundamental presupposition of adequate epistemological reflection. In this article it will be argued that the arguments for this majority conviction are not convincing. As an alternative it is suggested that the distin- ction between epistemic and non-epistemic procedures should be regarded as fundamental for epistemology.
    Direct download (3 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  13.  55
    Thomas Kuhn and the Strong Programme. An Appropriate Appropriation?Markus Seidel - 2024 - In K. Brad Wray (ed.), Kuhn's The Structure of Scientific Revolutions at 60. Cambridge University Press. pp. 235-253.
    This chapter discusses whether the appropriation of Kuhnian thoughts by the so-called Strong Programme in the sociology of scientific knowledge is appropriate. In order to answer the question of appropriate appropriation, Kuhn’s and the Strong Programme’s stances on two “isms” are compared: relativism and naturalism. It is shown that the Strong Programme clearly goes beyond Kuhn and breaks more radically with philosophical tradition. Nevertheless, there are also philosophical continuities and similarities.
    Direct download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  14.  84
    Einheit und Vielfalt in den Wissenschaften.Michael Klasen & Markus Seidel (eds.) - 2019 - Berlin: De Gruyter.
    Universitäten weisen als institutioneller Inbegriff von Wissenschaft eine immense Fächervielfalt auf. Doch was hält diese Vielfalt der Wissenschaften zusammen, und was sind deren jeweiligen Besonderheiten? Ist es überhaupt sinnvoll, solch unterschiedliche Forschungsbereiche wie zum Beispiel die Koptologie und die Materialphysik nach ähnlichen Standards zu bewerten und zu vergleichen? Ist solch eine Vielfalt notwendig für den Erkenntnisfortschritt oder eher ein Hemmnis, das es zu überwinden gilt? Wie hängen die Theorien, Methoden und Gegenstandsbereiche der verschiedenen Disziplinen miteinander zusammen – haben die Disziplinen (...)
  15.  63
    Balancing the Normativity of Expertise.Markus Seidel - 2019 - Social Epistemology Review and Reply Collective 8 (7):34-40.
  16.  91
    Rational Peer Disagreement Upon Sufficient Evidence: leaving the Track to Truth?Frieder Bögner, Markus Seidel, Konstantin Schnieder & Thomas Meyer - 2018 - In Ludger Jansen & Paul M. Näger (eds.), Peter van Inwagen: Materialism, Free Will and God. Cham: Springer. pp. 17-39.
    In this paper, we will discuss Peter van Inwagen’s contribution to the epistemological debate about revealed peer disagreement. Roughly, this debate focuses on situations in which at least two participants disagree on a certain proposition based on the same evidence. This leads to the problem of how one should react rationally when peer disagreement is revealed. Van Inwagen, as we will show, discusses four possible reactions, all of which he rejects as unsatisfying. Our proposal will be to point to hidden (...)
    Direct download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   1 citation  
  17. Is the Principle of Testimony Simply Epistemically Fundamental or Simply not? Swinburne on Knowledge by Testimony.Nicola Mößner & Markus Seidel - 2008 - In Nicola Mößner, Sebastian Schmoranzer & Christian Weidemann (eds.), Richard Swinburne: Christian Philosophy in a Modern World. ontos.
    The recently much discussed phenomenon of testimony as a social source of knowledge plays a crucial justificatory role in Richard Swinburne's philosophy of religion. Although Swinburne officially reduces his principle of testimony to the criterion of simplicity and, therefore, to a derivative epistemic source, we will show that simplicity does not play the crucial role in this epistemological context. We will argue that both Swinburne's philosophical ideas and his formulations allow for a fundamental epistemic principle of testimony, by showing that (...)
    Direct download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  18. Ludwik Fleck's Scientism.Markus Seidel - 2015 - Social Epistemology Review and Reply Collective 4 (8):79-88.
    In a recent paper in 'Social Epistemology' Dimitri Ginev aims to show that Ludwik Fleck uses transcendental arguments in two contexts in his work that are closely intertwined: the context of comparative cognitive sociology and the context of socio-historical epistemology. I am skeptical about Ginev’s interpretation and my aim is to show that at least the part of Ginev’s argument in which he aims to show Fleck’s use of transcendental arguments in the context of socio-historical epistemology is not convincing. To (...)
    Direct download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  19. Ernest Sosa: Targeting His Philosophy.Amrei Bahr & Markus Seidel (eds.) - 2016 - Cham: Springer.
    This volume provides the reader with exclusive insights into Ernest Sosa’s latest ideas as well as main aspects of his philosophical work of the last 50 years. Ernest Sosa, one of the most distinguished contemporary philosophers, is best known for his ground-breaking work in epistemology, and has also contributed greatly to metaphysics, metaphilosophy and philosophy of language.
  20. Von Wahrheit über Bedeutung zum Anti-Begriffsrelativismus? Davidsons Argumentation gegen den Begriffsrelativismus.Markus Seidel - 2008 - Facta Philosophica 10 (1):39-66.
    Since Davidson's proposal to use a Tarskian theory of truth in order to develop a theory of meaning has been criticised extensively, it is decisive to ask whether Davidson needs such a theory as an assumption and premise in other parts of his work. Especially, many authors have claimed that Davidson's argument in his paper 'On the Very Idea of a Conceptual Scheme' depends on his approach in the theory of meaning. It is argued that this interpretation is wrong and (...)
    Direct download (3 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   1 citation  
  21.  24
    Strong and Weak Metaphysical Quietism.Stefan Heßbrüggen, Julia Heße, Rudolf Owen Müllan, Stefan Reins, Ulrike Schuster & Markus Seidel - 2005 - In Andreas Vieth (ed.), Richard Rorty: His Philosophy Under Discussion. Verlag. pp. 109-118.
  22.  85
    What Is Fallibilist About Audi’s Fallibilist Foundationalism?Jochen Müller & Markus Seidel - 2018 - In Johannes Müller-Salo (ed.), Robert Audi: Critical Engagements. Cham: Springer Verlag. pp. 43-69.
    In this paper we show that Audi’s fallibilist foundationalism is beset by three unclarities. First, there is a conceptual unclarity in that Audi leaves open if and how to distinguish clearly between the concepts of fallibility and defeasibility. Second, there is a general unclarity: it is not always clear which fallibility/defeasibility-theses Audi accepts or denies. Finally, there is an unclarity of self-application because Audi does not specify his own claim that fallibilist foundationalism is an inductivist, and therefore itself fallible, thesis. (...)
    Direct download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  23. Between Relativism and Absolutism? – The Failure of Kuhn’s Moderate Relativism.Markus Seidel - 2013 - Was Dürfen Wir Glauben? Was Sollen Wir Tun? Sektionsbeiträge des Achten Internationalen Kongresses der Gesellschaft Für Analytische Philosophie E.V.
    In this paper I argue that a moderate form of epistemic relativism that is inspired by the work of Thomas Kuhn fails. First of all, it is shown that there is evidence to the effect that Kuhn already in his 'The Structure of Scientific Revolutions' proposes moderate relativism. Second, it is argued that moderate relativism is confronted with a severe dilemma that follows from Kuhn’s own argument for his relativistic conclusion. By focusing on the work of moderate relativists like Bernd (...)
    Direct download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   1 citation  
  24. Promiscuous Objects, Hybrid Truth and Scientific Realism.Julia Friederike Göhner & Markus Seidel - 2013 - In Marie I. Kaiser & Ansgar Seide (eds.), Philip Kitcher – Pragmatic Naturalism. Frankfurt/Main, Germany: ontos. pp. 111-127.
    Philip Kitcher’s account of scientific realism in 'The Advancement of Science' (AS) differs from his account in 'Science, Truth and Democracy' (STD). We demonstrate that (1) contrary to appearance, Kitcher in AS proposes a so-called Kantian realism that is accompanied not by a correspondence theory, but by a hybrid conception of truth. (2) Also, we point out that Kitcher does not pertain to the “promiscuous realism” proposed in STD stringently, but falls back on his Kantian realism of AS at points. (...)
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  25. Rule-Following and A Priori Biconditionals - A Sea of Tears?Amrei Bahr & Markus Seidel - 2015 - In Simon Derpmann & David P. Schweikard (eds.), Philip Pettit: Five Themes from his Work. Cham: Springer. pp. 19-31.
  26. Klassiker auslegen: Thomas S. Kuhn: Die Struktur wissenschaftlicher Revolutionen.Markus Seidel (ed.) - forthcoming - de Gruyter.
  27.  60
    A Snowslide of Entities. Does Sosa's Existential Relativism Provide a Barrier Against Being Buried?Markus Seidel & Alexander Thinius - 2016 - In Amrei Bahr & Markus Seidel (eds.), Ernest Sosa: Targeting His Philosophy. Cham: Springer. pp. 101-118.
    This paper discusses Sosa’s via media between existential relativism and absolutism. We discuss three implications of Sosa’s account which require some further clarification. First, we distinguish three alternative readings of Sosa’s account – the indexicalist, the homonymist and the (proper) relativist reading – and argue that they differ with respect to two crucial points: (a) they lead to different analyses of the lack of disagreement in existential discourse, and (b) they differ with respect to the question of whether conceptual schemes (...)
    Direct download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  28. Lessons in Multiculturalism and Objectivity? Puzzling Out Susan Haack's Philosophy of Education.Markus Seidel & Christoph Trüper - 2016 - In Julia Göhner & Eva M. Jung (eds.), Susan Haack: Reintegrating Philosophy. Springer. pp. 123-131.
  29. Trivial, Platitudinous, Boring? Searle on Conceptual Relativism.Markus Seidel & Arne Weber - 2010 - In Jan G. Michel, Dirk Franken & Attila Karakus (eds.), John R. Searle: Thinking about the Real World. Frankfurt: ontos/de Gruyter.
    In this paper we explore Searle’s defense of conceptual relativism. It emerges that Searle formulates the thesis in many different ways and that contrary to his contention not all are trivial and platitudinous. Specifically he does not distinguish clearly between an ontological and a linguistic version of conceptual relativism as well as between weak difference and stronger incommensurability of conceptual schemes. This has consequences for Searle’s defense of external realism.
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  30.  61
    Portraying the relativist spectrum: Martin Kusch: Relativism in the philosophy of science, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2020, 69 pp, £ 15. [REVIEW]Markus Seidel - 2021 - Metascience 30 (3):357-360.
  31. Review: Hoyningen-Huene, Paul: Systematicity. The Nature of Science. New York: Oxford University Press 2013. [REVIEW]Markus Seidel - 2014 - Zeitschrift für Philosophische Literatur 2 (4):33-38.
  32. How not to write an introduction to relativism: Bernd Irlenborn: Relativismus. Berlin/boston: Walter de Gruyter GmbH, 2016, 152pp, $35.00 PB. [REVIEW]Markus Seidel - 2017 - Metascience 27 (1):99-105.
  33.  71
    Review of 'Viewpoint Relativism' by Antti Hautamäki. [REVIEW]Markus Seidel - 2020 - Notre Dame Philosophical Reviews:N.N..
  34. K. Brad Wray: Kuhn's Evolutionary Social Epistemology. [REVIEW]Markus Seidel - 2013 - ZTS - Zeitschrift für Theoretische Soziologie 2:328-332.