Ein Plädoyer wider die Annahme einer fundamentalen Unterscheidung von Genese und Geltung in der Erkenntnistheorie

Zeitschrift für Philosophische Forschung 77 (4):454-483 (2023)
  Copy   BIBTEX

Abstract

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.

Links

PhilArchive



    Upload a copy of this work     Papers currently archived: 93,069

External links

Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server

Through your library

Similar books and articles

in der Kontingenz der noch zu vollendenden Tatsachen.Monika Wulz - 2014 - Zeitschrift für Kulturphilosophie 2014 (1):45-57.
Kennen und Erkennen. Ein Lehrbuch der Erkenntnistheorie.Friedrich Schneider - 1969 - Zeitschrift für Philosophische Forschung 23 (3):451-457.
Seele und Geist, Versuch einer Unterscheidung.Irmgard Gindl - 1956 - Zeitschrift für Philosophische Forschung 10 (4):646-649.

Analytics

Added to PP
2024-01-18

Downloads
46 (#355,781)

6 months
46 (#95,303)

Historical graph of downloads
How can I increase my downloads?

Author's Profile

Markus Seidel
University of Münster

Citations of this work

No citations found.

Add more citations

References found in this work

A material theory of induction.John D. Norton - 2003 - Philosophy of Science 70 (4):647-670.
What did Hume really show about induction?Samir Okasha - 2001 - Philosophical Quarterly 51 (204):307-327.
What did Hume Really Show about Induction&quest.Samir Okasha - 2001 - Philosophical Quarterly 51 (204):307-327.
Does Hume's argument against induction rest on a quantifier-shift fallacy?Samir Okasha - 2005 - Proceedings of the Aristotelian Society 105 (2):253-271.
X *—Does Hume’s Argument Against Induction Rest on a Quantifier-Shift Fallacy?Samir Okasha - 2005 - Proceedings of the Aristotelian Society 105 (1):237-255.

Add more references