Since the publication of W. V. Quine's classic paper “Epistemology Naturalized” there have been many discussion on the virtues and vices of naturalistic epistemology. Within these discussions not much attention has been paid to a basic question: What makes an epistemology naturalistic? I give an answer by providing a logical geography of competing naturalistic positions. Then I defend naturalistic epistemology against the charge of the so-called causal fallacy. Finally I give a critical appraisal of different naturalistic (...) theories of knowledge and introduce cooperative naturalism as the most promising research strategy. (shrink)

This essay is a discussion of Eve-Marie Engels' view on Evolutionary Epistemology (EE). In the first part two of the main doctrines of EE are criticized: (1.) that validity of human knowledge is to be explained as the result of evolutionary adaptation; yet (2.), that human cognitive capacities had been adequate to our ancestors life conditions but fail in relevant situations of modern world. In the second part the concept of reality underlying EE's adaptational view is discussed and compared (...) with Jean Piaget's concept of reality. Finally, it is held that some of the questions recently raised by proponents of EE, far from being new, have been dealt with already in historical epistemology. (shrink)

Das Buch ist eine analytische Darstellung der Hauptideen der Erkenntnistheorie Ingardens. Es basiert zum größten Teil auf dem bis vor kurzem noch unpublizierten bzw. ausschließlich in polnischer Sprache verfaßten Material und wendet sich vor allem an die Phänomenologen aber auch an die analytischen Philosophen, die sich für die Erkenntnistheorie und Ontologie der Intentionalität interessieren. Die Ingardensche Erkenntnistheorie, seine Theorie der Intentionalität und die Hauptzüge seiner Ontologie werden auf dem Hintergrund der Brentanoschen und Husserlschen Tradition präsentiert und mit (...) den begrifflichen Werkzeugen der zeitgenössischen analytischen Philosophie analysiert. Die Erkenntnistheorie Ingardens bildet das Ergebnis einer Synthese der Husserlschen phänomenologischen Methode mit der ontologischen Präzision, die für die Schriften Ingardens so charakteristisch ist. Sie besteht aus zwei Disziplinen: der reinen und der angewandten Erkenntnistheorie. Die reine Erkenntnistheorie ist eine absolutistische, Cartesianische Disziplin. Sie formuliert die Definition der Erkenntnis und beruht auf einem besonderen, selbstreferierenden Bewußtseinszustand, den Ingarden Intuition des Durchlebens nennt. Die angewandte Erkenntnistheorie untersucht dagegen die konkreten Fälle der Erkenntnis und ist eine empirische, hypothetische und fehlbare Wissenschaft. (shrink)

Wann ist es rational, etwas zu glauben? Wann ist ein Glaube gerechtfertigt, vernünftig, intellektuell akzeptabel? Was gilt es zu beachten, um ein Netz von Überzeugungen aus möglichst vielen wahren und möglichst wenig falschen Annahmen zu flechten? Um diese Fragen geht es in Theorien epistemischer Rechtfertigung. Ein Ansatz, der auf diesem Gebiet in jüngerer Zeit viel von sich Reden gemacht hat, ist die von Philosophen wie William Alston, Nicholas Wolterstorff, allen voran jedoch von Alvin Plantinga entwickelte sogenannte "Reformierte Erkenntnistheorie". Hier (...) werden Probleme epistemischer Rechtfertigung speziell im Hinblick auf die Frage verfolgt, ob und unter welchen Bedingungen religiöser Glaube gerechtfertigt, rational oder vernünftig ist. Die gegenwärtigen Diskussionen dieses Themas sind eines der interessantesten Gebiete angewandter Rechtfertigungstheorie. Sie liefern wichtige Einblicke sowohl in allgemeine Fragen epistemischer Rechtfertigung als auch in eine Grundfrage der Religionsphilosophie, die Frage nach dem Verhältnis zwischen Religion und Rationalität. Hier sieht man Erkenntnistheorie an der Arbeit. (shrink)

Die Rolle epistemischer Tugenden bei der Uberzeugungsbildung wurde in der Erkenntnistheorie lange vernachlassigt. Dies gilt auch fur die Analyse des Glaubens. Diese Arbeit greift dazu auf aktuelle Ansatze der Erkenntnistheorie zuruck, die als Virtue Epistemology firmieren und eine neue Losung des Problems anbieten. Epistemische Begriffe mussen demnach nicht allein kognitiv, sondern auch bezogen auf Eigenschaften und Dispositionen des erkennenden Subjekts untersucht werden, namlich auf Haltungen und Charakterzuge, die zur Bildung von Uberzeugungen fuhren. Dabei werden einerseits die religionsphilosophischen (...) Potenziale der Virtue Epistemology bei der Analyse des Glaubensbegriffs ausgeleuchtet, andererseits die Fokussierung auf die rein intellektualistische Rechtfertigung religioser Uberzeugungen korrigiert, so dass eine Pluralitat der Formen der Uberzeugungsbildung aufscheint, bei der auch epistemische Tugenden eine unverzichtbare Rolle spielen. Hierdurch wird die Zusammengehorigkeit von Glauben und Lebenshaltung, Epistemologie und Anthropologie deutlich gemacht. (shrink)

Die Erkenntnistheorie zählt zu den wichtigsten Teildisziplinen der theoretischen Philosophie. Seit 2000 hat sich die Disziplin sehr stark entwickelt. In diesem Zeitraum wurden in der Forschungsliteratur viele neue Antworten auf klassische erkenntnistheoretischen Fragen hervorgebracht und auch gänzlich neue Fragen und Probleme behandelt. Das Handbuch liefert einen Überblick über die aktuelle Entwicklung der Disziplin.

After Hegel's death, with the crisis of idealism and the triumphs of science, philosophy began to suffer an identity crisis, the legacy of which characterises 20th century epistemology. Against this background, the positions interpreted and compared in this study are distinguished by their innovative approaches to a solution: the rehabilitation, re-establishment and interdisciplinary expansion of epistemology, the reclaiming of its role of justifying orientation in everyday life and knowledge instead of its development as a narrow and specialised academic (...) discipline. These approaches provide a common reminder and challenge to contemporary philosophy not to bury the problematic dimensions of epistemology, including the means of justifcation. (shrink)

This paper explains and defends Reinhold’s epistemology of disagreement. The concept of agreement is of central importance for Reinhold’s philosophy. He attempts to settle the most basic disputes among post-Kantian philosophers by offering intermediate positions that reconcile the seemingly incompatible views. Moreover, Reinhold argues for epistemic objectivism, that is, the thesis that a group of philosophers sharing the same information and respecting each other’s opinion may not reasonably disagree. If the members of such a group search for truth then (...) they must converge toward consensus. Disagreement is irrational. (shrink)

The paper aims at clarifying the relationship between philosophy of science, epistemology and metaphysics. I begin with a characterization of philosophy. Philosophy as a second order discipline differs from any of the individual sciences. Typically, it attempts to answer questions of the form "How is it possible that p?". Next I present the aims and tasks of epistemology, before, finally, I turn to the relationship between philosophy of science and epistemology. At this point, metaphysics enters the scene. (...) It turns out that philosophy of science includes three different projects that result from philosophy's being a second order discipline. Applied to the sciences, a second order discipline is possible in three different forms that complement one another. _German_ Ziel meines Aufsatzes ist es, das ungeklärte Verhältnis zwischen Wissenschaftstheorie, Erkenntnistheorie und Metaphysik zu klären. Dazu muss zunächst etwas über den Charakter der Philosophie gesagt werden. Philosophie ist als eine Disziplin zweiter Ordnung von jeder Einzelwissenschaft verschieden. Insbesondere versucht sie,,Was ist F?"-Fragen und,,Wie möglich?"-Fragen zu beantworten. Anschließend stelle ich die Ziele und Aufgaben der Erkenntnistheorie vor und gehe schließlich auf das Verhältnis zwischen Wissenschaftstheorie und Erkenntnistheorie ein; dabei kommt die Metaphysik ins Spiel. Es zeigt sich, dass die Wissenschaftstheorie drei unterschiedliche Projekte umfaßt, die sich ganz folgerichtig aus dem Charakter der Philosophie als einer Disziplin zweiter Stufe ergeben. In Anwendung auf die Wissenschaften ist eine Disziplin zweiter Stufe in drei einander ergänzenden Formen möglich. (shrink)

An introduction to epistemology with a focus on different accounts of knowledge, scepticism, belief, truth, rationality and justification, the sources of knowledge.

The epistomology of the definition of number and the philosophical foundation of arithmetic based on a comparison between Gottlob Frege's logicism and Platonic philosophy (Syrianus, Theo Smyrnaeus, and others). The intention of this article is to provide arithmetic with a logically and methodologically valid definition of number for construing a consistent philosophical foundation of arithmetic. The – surely astonishing – main thesis is that instead of the modern and contemporary attempts, especially in Gottlob Frege's Foundations of Arithmetic, such a definition (...) is found in the arithmetic in Euclid's Elements. To draw this conclusion a profound reflection on the role of epistemology for the foundation of mathematics, especially for the method of definition of number, is indispensable; a reflection not to be found in the contemporary debate (the predominate ‘pragmaticformalism’ in current mathematics just shirks from trying to solve the epistemological problems raised by the debate between logicism, intuitionism, and formalism). Frege's definition of number, ‘The number of the concept F is the extension of the concept ‘numerically equal to the concept F”, which is still substantial for contemporary mathematics, does not fulfil the requirements of logical and methodological correctness because the definiens in a double way (in the concepts ‘extension of a concept’ and ‘numerically equal’) implicitly presupposes the definiendum, i.e. number itself. Number itself, on the contrary, is defined adequately by Euclid as ‘multitude composed of units’, a definition which is even, though never mentioned, an implicit presupposition of the modern concept ofset. But Frege rejects this definition and construes his own - for epistemological reasons: Frege's definition exactly fits the needs of modern epistemology, namely that for to know something like the number of a concept one must become conscious of a multitude of acts of producing units of ‘given’ representations under the condition of a 1:1 relationship to obtain between the acts of counting and the counted ‘objects’. According to this view, which has existed at least since the Renaissance stoicism and is maintained not only by Frege but also by Descartes, Kant, Husserl, Dummett, and others, there is no such thing as a number of pure units itself because the intellect or pure reason, by itself empty, must become conscious of different units of representation in order to know a multitude, a condition not fulfilled by Euclid's conception. As this is Frege's main reason to reject Euclid's definition of number (others are discussed in detail), the paper shows that the epistemological reflection in Neoplatonic mathematical philosophy, which agrees with Euclid's definition of number, provides a consistent basement for it. Therefore it is not progress in the history of science which hasled to the a poretic contemporary state of affairs but an arbitrary change of epistemology in early modern times, which is of great influence even today. (shrink)

This article addresses the question whether or not, in his Ethics, Spinoza is committed to a naturalized epistemology. In the first step, the cognitive psychological principles involved in the concept of imagination are discussed. It is shown that Spinoza does indeed suggest a causal account for the contents of human thought, yet, in contrast to many psychologist views he does not privilege physicalist explanations, but allows for historical as well as for linguistic accounts. In the second section, a similar (...) differentiation is made in regard to the theory of common notions. Whereas in claiming that human minds necessarily have adequate knowledge of certain properties of things, Spinoza does rely on certain psychological facts, his concept of common notions can better be explicated independently of psychological assumptions. A conclusive argument against a naturalist interpretation of Spinoza′s epistemology, however, is given in the third section via the analysis of the concepts of 'truth′ and 'true idea′. It shows that Spinoza not only embraces the idea of an epistemic normativity, but moreover admits the irrecucibilityof this normativity to natural properties. Since, in respect to moral normativity, Spinoza exhibits quite a different attitude, it can be assumed that he never wanted to provide naturalized epistemology. (shrink)

After Hegel's death, with the crisis of idealism and the triumphs of science, philosophy began to suffer an identity crisis, the legacy of which characterises 20th century epistemology. Against this background, the positions interpreted and compared in this study are distinguished by their innovative approaches to a solution: the rehabilitation, re-establishment and interdisciplinary expansion of epistemology, the reclaiming of its role of justifying orientation in everyday life and knowledge instead of its development as a narrow and specialised academic (...) discipline. These approaches provide a common reminder and challenge to contemporary philosophy not to bury the problematic dimensions of epistemology, including the means of justifcation. (shrink)

Was für eine Art von Beziehung ist die Erkenntnisbeziehung? Ihre geläufige Konzeption im Sinne einer linearen Subjekt-Objekt-Beziehung bildet so etwas wie den Boden, bzw. das logische Rückgrat der Erkenntnistheorie. Von ihr leiten sich weitestgehend die Annahmen, Vorstellungen und Begriffe her, in denen wir über Erkenntnis (als Tätigkeit und als Produkt) kommunizieren. Und insofern ist sie auf informelle oder explizite Weise auch ein Kernelement unserer Auffassung von Wissenschaft. Die Bezeichnung als 'logisches Rückgrat' der Erkenntnistheorie verweist dabei zugleich auf ihren (...) heuristisch-funktionalen Zusammenhang mit der zentralen Aufgabe der Erkenntnistheorie, nämlich der rationalen Rekonstruktion der Beziehung zwischen Inhalt und Gegenstand der Erkenntnis. Es ist diese Aufgabe, die den meta-wissenschaftlichen Status und Anspruch der Erkenntnistheorie begründet. Die genannte Konzeption widerspricht aber zugleich ganz grundlegend unserem Selbstverständnis als 'Teil der Natur' (d.h. als natürlicher Gegenstand unter den anderen Gegenständen der Erkenntnis), von dem auch die 'naturalistischen' Erkenntnistheorien ausgehen. Demnach ist der reale Boden der Erkenntnisreflexion grundsätzlich nicht als lineare Beziehung, sondern als holistische Situation zu begreifen. Das eröffnet einen Spielraum der Reflexion und Kritik, die letztlich zwingend zu einer Re-Konzeption der Erkenntnisbeziehung als eine holistische Erkenntnissituation führt, mit umfassenden logischen und konzeptuellen Konsequenzen für das Grundverständnis des Erkenntnisvorgangs, und in weiterer Folge auch für das Verständnis von Wissenschaft. (shrink)

This is a review of Kuenzle, Dominique: Refurbishing Epistemology. A Meta-Epistemological Framework. Berlin: De Gruyter, 2017.

The author takes the interdisciplinary seminar on Evolutionary Epistemology at the 7th International Wittgenstein Symposium as the occasion to discuss the question of the status, achievements and limits of Evolutionary Epistemology. She comes to the conclusion that neither its critique of the quid juris question in traditional epistemology nor its own philosophical pretensions can be justified. But it is a new science which is relevant and a challenge to traditional epistemology and philosophy of science in that (...) it opens up a horizon of new questions which they will have to take seriously. (shrink)

The author takes the interdisciplinary seminar on Evolutionary Epistemology at the 7th International Wittgenstein Symposium as the occasion to discuss the question of the status, achievements and limits of Evolutionary Epistemology. She comes to the conclusion that neither its critique of thequid juris question in traditional epistemology nor its own philosophical pretensions can be justified. But it is a new science which is relevant and a challenge to traditional epistemology and philosophy of science in that it (...) opens up a horizon of new questions which they will have to take seriously. Sie sind den Kindern ähnlich, die, wenn sie in einen Spiegel geguckt, ihn sogleich umwenden, um zu sehen, was auf der anderen Seite ist. Johann Wolfgang von Goethe Es gab Ewigkeiten, in denen (der menschliche Intellekt) nicht war;... nur sein Besitzer und Erzeuger nimmt ihn so pathetisch, als ob die Angeln der Welt sich in ihm drehten. Könnten wir uns aber mit der Mücke verständigen, so würden wir vernehmen, daß auch sie mit diesem Pathos durch die Luft schwimmt und in sich das fliegende Zentrum dieser Welt fühlt. Es ist nichts so verwerflich und gering in der Natur, was nicht durch einen kleinen Anhauch jener Kraft des Erkennens sofort wie ein Schlauch aufgeschwellt würde; und wie jeder Lastträger seinen Bewunderer haben will, so meint gar der stolzeste Mensch, der Philosoph, von allen Seiten die Augen des Weltalls teleskopisch auf sein Handeln und Denken gerichtet zu sehen. Friedrich Nietzsche. (shrink)

Dieser Band der Husserliana Materialien enthält die Erstveröffentlichung der Dissertation von Winthrop Pickard Bell, dem ersten englischsprachigen Doktoranden Edmund Husserls. In seiner Arbeit untersucht Bell die Erkenntnistheorie seines einstigen Harvard-Professors, dem amerikanischen Pragmatisten und Idealisten Josiah Royce, und entwickelt hierzu eine Kritik vom Standpunkt der Husserl'schen Erkenntnisphänomenologie. Husserl selbst hatte ihn gebeten, über dieses Thema zu forschen. Die Beilagen dieses Bandes beinhalten Husserls Kommentare und Änderungsvorschläge zu der Arbeit sowie die 1922 im "Jahrbuch der philosophischen Fakultät in Göttingen" erschienene (...) Zusammenfassung derselben. Nachdem Winthrop Bell zwei Jahre in Harvard bei Josiah Royce studiert hatte, kam er 1910 nach Leipzig. Hier und später in Göttingen befasste er sich mit Husserls Phänomenologie und schloss sich dem Kreis der Studenten an, der sich um Husserl und Reinach als "Göttinger philosophische Gesellschaft" gebildet hatte. Im Sommer 1914 stellte Bell seine Dissertation schließlich zu einem denkbar ungünstigen Zeitpunkt fertig. Als kanadischer Staatsbürger - und somit Bürger eines Landes der feindlichen Alliierten - wurde er mit Ausbruch des Ersten Weltkriegs im August 1914 inhaftiert und verbrachte fast die gesamte Kriegszeit in einem Gefangenenlager bei Berlin. Das Dissertationsverfahren konnte erst im Jahr 1922 abgeschlossen werden. Im Zuge dieser Turbulenzen erschien 1922 lediglich eine Zusammenfassung von Bells Doktorarbeit im "Jahrbuch der philosophischen Fakultät in Göttingen", die Arbeit selbst blieb bis 2012 in Kanada unter Verschluss. Auf Husserls nachdrückliche Empfehlung trat Bell jedoch 1922 eine Professur in Harvard an und trug maßgeblich zur Verbreitung der Husserl’schen Phänomenologie in Nordamerika bei. Die Kapitel „Die ‚erste Ansicht des Idealismus‘ und die Voraussetzungen der Royce’schen Erkenntnistheorie“ und „Kritik von Royces Voraussetzungen. Der eigentliche Boden einer Erkenntnistheorie. Die reine Wesenslehre des Bewusstseins“ sind auf link.springer.com unter der Creative Commons Namensnennung 4.0 International Lizenz veröffentlicht. This book was produced with the generous funding of the Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council of Canada, KU Leuven, the Harrison McCain Foundation, the University of New Brunswick Busteed Publication Fund, the Department of Philosophy at the University of New Brunswick, and David Mawhinney. (shrink)

It is well known that in the late nineteenth and early twentieth centuries the Brentano school interacted fruitfully with early analytic philosophy: the Russell-Meinong debate is a paradigm example of this interaction. But Brentanians also engaged with other schools of philosophy. In his article “Psychologie und Erkenntnistheorie” (1892) Stumpf took on two opponents: Kant and the leading neo-Kantians – in his terminology ‘criticists’ – as well as the so-called ‘psychologists’. The former want to do epistemology independently of psychology, (...) the latter reduce epistemology to psychology. Both, according to Stumpf, are wrong. In developing his argument, he expounds and clarifies central aspects of his own philosophy. “Psychologie und Erkenntnistheorie” is therefore, among other things, an introduction to main themes in Stumpf's work. See Mark Textor (2020) Stumpf between criticism and psychologism: introducing “Psychologie und Erkenntnistheorie”, British Journal for the History of Philosophy, 28:6, 1172-1180, for an introductory overview. (shrink)

Nelson's Proof of the Impossibility of the Theory of Knowledge -/- In addressing the possibility of a theory of knowledge, Leonard Nelson noted the contradiction of an epistemological criterion that one would require in order to differentiate between valid and invalid knowledge. Nelson concluded that the inconsistency of such a criterion proves the impossibility of the theory of knowledge. -/- Had the epistemological criterion had a perception, then it would presume to adjudicate on its own truth (thus epistemological circular argument). (...) However, if one were to assume that the criterion is not knowledge, one would then have to justify how this is a criterion for truth - yet this would only be possible when it may be considered as an object of knowledge. One would equally have had to predetermine the criterion in order to determine the truth of this knowledge, thereby providing another circular argument. Ostensibly, every criterion of truth fails at its very own test since it cannot guarantee its own truth, just as Munchausen, contrary to his assertion, could not draw himself out of the swamp by tugging on a tuft of his own hair. -/- Nelson proposed a solution of the epistemological problem (the question of the differentiation between valid and invalid knowledge), that based on Jakob Friedrich Fries' differentiation between proof and deduction. Proof, according to Nelson (in reference to Fries), can be defined as derivation of truth from one statement from another statement. Thus, from the truth in the statement that "all men are mortal", one is then able to say that "Socrates is a man" and thence extrapolate from the truth of the statement that "Socrates is mortal." If knowledge were to be considered somewhat judgmental (in a statement), then an attempt at proof (i.e. recourse to previous judgments) would inevitably lead to an infinite regression in justification, since each judgment would necessitate a further justification from another judgment. Every attempt to prove an epistemological criterion is thus also confronted by this regression in justification. -/- Nelson's attempt at a solution rests on the assumption of the existence of an immediate knowledge as a justification of the truth (mediate) of knowledge. Nelson considers immediate knowledge to be non-judgmental knowledge. These include intuitions (e. g. seeing-the-red-roof) and also philosophical knowledge that pre-exists in his opinion before a judgmental reflexion (immediate) in our reason (e. g. the principle of causality). -/- Proof of the truth of mediate knowledge can be effected by showing its compliance with attendant immediate knowledge (rational truth = correspondence of mediate knowledge with their immediate knowledge). Nelson considered this as a resolution of the circular epistemological argument. In regard to philosophical knowledge, Nelson sees these as subject to deduction and not proof. The following example illustrates the goal of deduction: -/- An approach for deducing the principle of causality: A) Every change has a cause. (The principle of causality) A´) A is a reiteration of an immediate knowledge. (Meta-assertion following A) -/- "A" may not be provable, but A´ may justified, and thus Nelson identified it as a deduction following from A. // reference: http://www.friesian.com/nelproof.htm. (shrink)

This essay is a discussion of Eve-Marie Engels' view on Evolutionary Epistemology (EE). In the first part two of the main doctrines of EE are criticized: (1.) that validity of human knowledge is to be explained as the result of evolutionary adaptation; yet (2.), that human cognitive capacities had been adequate to our ancestors life conditions but fail in relevant situations of modern world. In the second part the concept of reality underlying EE's adaptational view is discussed and compared (...) with Jean Piaget's concept of reality. Finally, it is held that some of the questions recently raised by proponents of EE, far from being new, have been dealt with already in historical epistemology. (shrink)

With his influence on the development of physiology, physics and geometry, Hermann von Helmholtz – like few scientists of the second half of the 19th century – is representative of the research in natural science in Germany. The development of his understanding of science is not less representative. Until the late sixties, he emphatically claimed the truth of science; later on, he began to see the conditions for the validity of scientific knowledge in relative terms, and this can, in summary, (...) be referred to as hypothesizing. Already in the past century, HeImholtz made first approaches to an understanding of science, which were incompatible with his own former position and which pointed to the modern age to an astonishingly large extent. A comparison with Karl R. Popper's logic of research will illustrate how closely he nevertheless approached modern understanding of science. In Popper's logic of research, hypothesizing of scientific knowledge is definitely much more advanced than in Helmholtz's theory of science. What begins vaguely to emerge with Helmholtz has already become an explicitly formulated programme with Popper. Although HeImholtz and Popper are not on a direct line of epistemological development and Popper refers to HeImholtz only rarely and casually, there are in fact surprising points of contact which have not been taken notice of so far and which appear above all if one looks at Helmholtz's understanding of science against the background of Popper's logic of research. (shrink)

A careful discussion of the major logical and epistemological issues raised and solutions suggested by the original members and followers of the "Vienna Circle." The author shows the progressive elaboration of the positions of this school by its major figures and shows where opinions diverge within the movement. The discussion is amply documented with references to the standard literature. The book aims at reviving interest in the "scientific method of philosophising" in the German speaking world.--R. G. S.

Die Physik als Wissenschaft übt eine besondere Faszination auf die Philosophie aus. Wohl deshalb, weil sie einen ähnlich fundamentalen Erkenntnisanspruch erhebt, wie die Philosophie selbst. Aber auch, weil sie in hohem Ausmaß Erkenntnissicherheit vermittelt und aus diesem Grund großes Vertrauen genießt. Dennoch scheint der Primat der Philosophie unzweifelhaft, und zwar aus dem schlichten Grund, dass es sich bei der Physik als Wissenschaft um ein Resultat menschlicher Erkenntnistätigkeit handelt, das insofern der 'Jurisdiktion' der Erkenntnistheorie unterliegt. Allerdings ist auch die (...) class='Hi'>Erkenntnistheorie ein Resultat menschlicher Erkenntnistätigkeit. Worauf gründet sich also die Legitimation der Erkenntnistheorie? Grundlage dieser Legitimation ist die 'idealisierte' Deutung der holistischen Erkenntnissituation im Sinne einer linearen Subjekt-Objekt-Beziehung, d.h. eine Deutung, die das erkennende Subjekt den Objekten der Erkenntnis 'gegenüberstellt'. Diese Deutung steht allerdings im Widerspruch zu unserem Wissen darum, als Erkennende selbst Teil der 'Welt' als der Gesamtheit der Erkenntnisgegenstände zu sein. Und sie steht auch in klarem Widerspruch zur klassischen Hierarchie der Wissenschaften und generell zum umfassenden Erkenntnisanspruch der Naturwissenschaft. Die Aufgabe, die sich aus dieser Perspektive stellt, ist die Dekonstruktion der Kernelemente der linearen, vor-wissenschaftlichen Erkenntnisvorstellung und ineins damit ihre Rekonstruktion auf Grundlage der Anerkennung des Holismus der realen Erkenntnissituation. Den Maßstab des Erfolgs der Rekonstruktion bildet die Adäquatheit der Rekonstruktion des Phänomens Erkenntnis in all seinen unterschiedlichen Facetten. Zu diesen gehört im Speziellen auch das dekonstruktive Erkenntniskonzept der Physik mit seiner mathematischen Heuristik. (shrink)

A careful discussion of the major logical and epistemological issues raised and solutions suggested by the original members and followers of the "Vienna Circle." The author shows the progressive elaboration of the positions of this school by its major figures and shows where opinions diverge within the movement. The discussion is amply documented with references to the standard literature. The book aims at reviving interest in the "scientific method of philosophising" in the German speaking world.--R. G. S.

Summary In the first part of this contribution, the three probably most influential conceptions of evolutionary epistemology are surveyed, as they were put forward by Konrad Lorenz, Gerhard Vollmer, and Rupert Riedl, respectively. It is demonstrated that, as far as the essentials are concerned, these conceptions largely correspond with each other as well as with a further conception advanced by Karl Popper from the point of view of Critical Rationalism. It can be clearly shown, moreover, that fundamentals of the (...) latter conception can be traced back to Popper's earliest publications (e. g., to hisLogik der Forschung [The Logic of Scientific Discovery]). By means of an examination of the language used by these authors, it is tried to elucidate the fact that, for the reasons of lacking consideration of the lingual/non-lingual distinction and of faults and inadequacies in consequence of this lack alone, the proposed conceptions can be rejected as being at least highly defective. (shrink)

The time of „philosophical systems“ seems to be definitively over since Kant and Hegel. On this background, the publication of the work „Neues System der philosophischen Wissenschaften im Grundriss“ (New System of Philosophical Sciences in Ground Plan) is a truly spectacular philosophical event: Dirk Hartmann deliberately follows Hegel‘s „Enzyklopädie der philosophischen Wissenschaften im Grundrisse“ of 1817 in the title of his work, in order to make clear the intention and claim of his opus magnum: In contrast to the increased fragmentation (...) and specialization of philosophy in the 20th century, Hartmann focuses on the philosophical treatment of the whole: In seven volumes, he discusses the classical philosophical problems in their interdependent context, not cataloguing them one after the other, but by consistently developing them from one another. Volume I deals with central epistemological problems: „What is knowledge?“, „Is knowledge even possible?“, „Are there forms of substantial non-empirical truth?“, „Is there an ideal language?“, „Can logic be reasoned?“ and „What is science?”. Since this is the first volume of the entire system, the question „What is philosophy?“ is raised at the very beginning too, and the reasons why philosophy should begin with epistemology are expounded. Finally, the criterion of meaning guiding the entire work, the principle of knowability, is justified and defended against pertinent objections. (shrink)

The author takes a collection of essays on concepts and approaches in evolutionary epistemology as the occasion for a critical discussion of the limits and achievements of evolutionary epistemology as well as of certain philosophical objections to the very project itself. She comes to the conclusion that evolutionary epistemology, even if it cannot explain cognition itself, can nevertheless shed light on the complex phenomenon of cognition by demonstrating the presence of traces of our evolutionary past in cognition. (...) Modern research into the structure and functioning of the brain supports this conclusion. The author argues that the questions which evolutionary epistemology can legitimately pose and answer are such that it is not in competition with traditional epistemology. For this reason she suggests that this research program be renamed "evolutionäre Informationstheorie", in the hope that its aims will become clearer to proponents as well as opponents. In the final section the author discusses the possibility that an evolutionary approach might explain the fact that human beings are less and less capable of dealing with the complexity of the world they have created. (shrink)

by Carl Stumpf. [467] ii When Zeller, iii in the lecture “On the meaning and mission of epistemology”, iv called for a renewed fostering of this science, he designated as its mission the study of t...

In identifying that the 'essential tension' is the balance between conservative and innovative approaches in the development of knowledge - tried-and tested or new directions - Kuhn pointed out that these two attitudes are both appropriate. This study adds to this picture the social and psychological dynamics that underpin any such balancing.

In the long history of the substance–problem – from Aristotle to e.g. David Wiggins – very different analytical approaches have fostered its deepening and its clearing step by step. Not only titular Analytical Philosophers, also Analytical Philosophers avant la lettre, e.g. Kant, have contributed to this kind of approach. In the following text it is to be shown how these contributions switch fruitfully between ontological, semantical (res. grammatical), epistemological and logical aspects.

Groups engage in epistemic activity all the time--whether it be the active collective inquiry of scientific research groups or crime detection units, or the evidential deliberations of tribunals and juries, or the informational efforts of the voting population in general--and yet in philosophy there is still relatively little epistemology of groups to help explore these epistemic practices and their various dimensions of social and philosophical significance. The aim of this book is to address this lack, by presenting original essays (...) in the field of collective epistemology, exploring these regions of epistemic practice and their significance for Epistemology, Political Philosophy, Ethics, and the Philosophy of Science. (shrink)

In this essay, the enlightenment is not considered as a bygone age, but as a systematic epistemological, moral and political program that can, in principle, be pursued at any time. Since Kant has done most to clarify this program, his philosophy may serve as a starting point for discussion of the questions: How do the leading ideas of the enlightenment hang together? How are they justified?

Based on the London Lecture Series of the Royal Institute of Philosophy for 2006–7, this collection brings together essays from leading figures in a rapidly developing field of philosophy. Contributors include: Alvin Goldman, Timothy Williamson, Duncan Pritchard, Miranda Fricker, Scott Sturgeon, Jose Zalabardo, and Quassin Casay.

To what end should or do we pursue philosophy and how? Meta-philosophical questions along these lines have gained more and more interest recently. The collected volume "Erkenntnistheorie — Wie und wozu?" (Engl.: "Epistemology — How and to what end?") aspires to raise and tackle issues addressing the meta-epistemological questions "How is epistemology practiced and to what end?". Although this aim sounds like a descriptive meta-epistemological endeavor, it is not surprising that many authors rather argue for normative claims (...) surrounding the questions "How and to what end should epistemology be pursued?". This review provides an overview on the collected volume and offers a critical evaluation of its overall achievement. (shrink)

To what end should or do we pursue philosophy and how? Meta-philosophical questions along these lines have gained more and more interest recently. The collected volume ‘‘Erkenntnistheorie—Wie und wozu?’’ (Engl.: ‘‘Epistemology—How and to what end?’’) aspires to raise and tackle issues addressing the meta-epistemological questions ‘‘How is epistemology practiced and to what end?’’ (9). Although this aim sounds like a descriptive meta-epistemological endeavor, it is not surprising that many authors rather argue for normative claims surrounding the questions (...) ‘‘How and to what end should epistemology be pursued?’’. This review provides an overview on the collected volume and offers a critical evaluation of its overall achievement. (shrink)

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.

This publication is an appreciation of the natural philosophy and epistemology of the philosopher Grete (Henry-)Hermann. A student of the mathematician Emmy Noether and the philosopher Leonard Nelson, she was one of the early interpreters of quantum mechanics. Werner Heisenberg memorialized her in his book "The Part and the Whole". For the first time, her writings on natural philosophy and epistemology are collected in one volume. An extensive introduction by various authors introduces the work of Grete Henry-Hermann. This (...) edition is supplemented by excerpts from correspondence on natural philosophical and epistemological topics, including correspondence with Carl Friedrich von Weizsäcker, Werner Heisenberg, and Gustav Heckmann. Contents ● Grete Henry-Hermann's contribution to the interpretation of quantum mechanics ● Grete Henry-Hermann's work on the relationship between modern physics and transcendental philosophy ● Grete Hermann's dissertation: The Question of the Finitely Many Steps in the Theory of Polynomial Ideals (1925) ● Discussions on the question of free will and the significance of behavioral research for the critique of reason ● Excerpts from correspondence from 1925 to 1982. (shrink)

The philosophy of modality investigates necessity and possibility, and related notions--are they objective features of mind-independent reality? If so, are they irreducible, or can modal facts be explained in other terms? This volume presents new work on modality by established leaders in the field and by up-and-coming philosophers. Between them, the papers address fundamental questions concerning realism and anti-realism about modality, the nature and basis of facts about what is possible and what is necessary, the nature of modal knowledge, modal (...) logic and its relations to necessary existence and to counterfactual reasoning. The general introduction locates the individual contributions in the wider context of the contemporary discussion of the metaphysics and epistemology of modality. (shrink)

The brevity of the book prevents it from being more than an introduction to some epistemological problems. As such it is useful; Schneider has succeeded in sketching in a few pages an amazing number of different epistemological positions, paying some attention to modern scientific developments.--K. H.

As indicated by its subtitle, this dissertation is intended as an examination of the relationship between ontology and epistemology in Descartes' philosophy. The author is aware that a study of the philosophical system of one philosopher cannot be expected to decide the relationship between the theory of knowledge and of reality as such. However, proceeding from "the generally accepted... thesis" of metascience "that a knowledge of reality which is without presuppositions and independent of the subject or of a theory (...) is impossible," he is convinced that the dogmatism and circularity of thinking using epistemological principles as ontological descriptions and vice versa are not merely characteristic of Cartesian thought but are necessary, essential features of every philosophical attempt "at a universally valid and unmodifiable theory of knowledge and reality". His study of Descartes' case merely confirms the view that the realization of a system "claiming incorrigible validity without dogmatic procedures or without intrinsic incoherences is impossible". The purpose of the book is to expose the metaphysical presuppositions of Cartesianism first with regard to the Cogito-argumentation and its inner-systematic role, then with regard to the function of the idea of God in the system, and finally with regard to the understanding of the relations between metaphysics and physics. A summary of the results of the study is to answer the question concerning "the ultimate theoretical conditions of the formulation of a philosophical system like Cartesianism and concerning the responsibility for the incoherences discovered". (shrink)

The essay analyses the importance and the limits of Evolutionary Epistemology . Firstly, the history of EE is shortly described - especially its history in the last century. Secondly, its main arguments are reproduced. Thirdly, the points are treated in which EE really signifies a progress in comparison with traditional epistemology. Fourthly, however, it is shown that it does not solve at all the central problem of epistemology - the validity claim of knowledge. Only a broader philosophical (...) framework - that of objective idealism - could reconcile the validity dimension with the genetic insights of EE. (shrink)

The essay analyses the importance and the limits of Evolutionary Epistemology (EE). Firstly, the history of EE is shortly described — especially its history in the last century. Secondly, its main arguments are reproduced. Thirdly, the points are treated in which EE really signifies a progress in comparison with traditional epistemology. Fourthly, however, it is shown that it does not solve at all the central problem of epistemology — the validity claim of knowledge. Only a broader philosophical (...) framework — that of objective idealism — could reconcile the validity dimension with the genetic insights of EE. (shrink)

The Biotheoretical Shortcomings of the Evolutionary Epistemology. The concept of evolutionary epistemology has been critically discussed by philosophers who have mainly pointed to unacceptable philosophical tenets (cf. Vittorio Hösle, this Journal, Vol. 19 (1988), pp. 348-377). However, as most philosophers are extremely reluctant to critically treat the biological theories on which the ideas of evolutionary epistemology are based, the invalid concepts of adaption escaped their critical scrutiny. Therefore the influence of preconceived biological theories on the biological basis (...) of evolutionary epistemology and the distorting consequences on the philosophical level could not be elaborated. The following context sketches a new view of organismic reasoning and its impact on evolutionary aspects of epistemology. The basic theorem of adaptation is shown to be unacceptable and invalid if organisms are conceived as autonomous entities which can only evolve according to their specific internal organismic properties. (shrink)

This book provides a valuable look at the work of up and coming epistemologists. The topics covered range from the central issues of mainstream epistemology to the more formal issues in epistemic logic and confirmation theory. This book should be read by anyone interested in seeing where epistemology is currently focused and where it is heading. - Stewart Cohen , Arizona State University..

This book constitutes the revised versions of the invited and selected papers from the Second Epistemological Perspectives on Simulation Workshop, EPOS 2006, which was held in Brescia, Italy, during October 5-6, 2006. The 11 papers presented together with 2 invited papers were carefully reviewed and selected from 35 submissions. The topics addressed were epistemological and methodological contents, such as the relevance of empirical foundations for agent-based simulations, the role of theory, the concepts and meaning of emergence, the trade-off between simplification (...) and complexification of models. (shrink)