Veritistic Value and the Project of Social Epistemology

2002 ◽  
Vol 64 (1) ◽  
pp. 191-198 ◽  
Author(s):  
PHILIP KITCHER
Keyword(s):  
Social Epistemology ◽  
Veritistic Value

scholarly journals A diachronic perspective on peer disagreement in veritistic social epistemology

Synthese ◽  
2018 ◽  
Vol 197 (10) ◽  
pp. 4475-4493
Author(s):  
Erik J. Olsson
Keyword(s):  
Computer Simulation ◽  
Social Epistemology ◽  
Main Issue ◽  
Simulation Framework ◽  
Peer Disagreement ◽  
Simulation Techniques ◽  
Meta Level ◽  
Veritistic Value ◽  
Bayesian Simulation ◽  
Over Time

Abstract The main issue in the epistemology of peer disagreement is whether known disagreement among those who are in symmetrical epistemic positions undermines the rationality of their maintaining their respective views. Douven and Kelp have argued convincingly that this problem is best understood as being about how to respond to peer disagreement repeatedly over time, and that this diachronic issue can be best approached through computer simulation. However, Douven and Kelp’s favored simulation framework cannot naturally handle Christensen’s famous Mental Math example. As a remedy, I introduce an alternative (Bayesian) simulation framework, Laputa, inspired by Alvin Goldman’s seminal work on veritistic social epistemology. I show that Christensen’s conciliatory response, reasonably reconstructed and supplemented, gives rise to an increase in epistemic (veritistic) value only if the peers continue to recheck their mental math; else the peers might as well be steadfast. On a meta-level, the study illustrates the power of Goldman’s approach when combined with simulation techniques for handling the computational issues involved.

scholarly journals A Simulation Approach to Veritistic Social Epistemology

Episteme ◽  
2011 ◽  
Vol 8 (2) ◽  
pp. 127-143 ◽  
Author(s):  
Erik J. Olsson
Keyword(s):  
Computer Simulation ◽  
Social Epistemology ◽  
Social Practices ◽  
Simulation Approach ◽  
Simulation Environment ◽  
False Beliefs ◽  
Concrete Case ◽  
Large Classes ◽  
Computational Problem ◽  
Veritistic Value

In a seminal book, Alvin I. Goldman outlines a theory for how to evaluate social practices with respect to their “veritistic value”, i.e., their tendency to promote the acquisition of true beliefs (and impede the acquisition of false beliefs) in society. In the same work, Goldman raises a number of serious worries for his account. Two of them concern the possibility of determining the veritistic value of a practice in a concrete case because (1) we often don't know what beliefs are actually true, and (2) even if we did, the task of determining the veritistic value would be computationally extremely difficult. Neither problem is specific to Goldman's theory and both can be expected to arise for just about any account of veritistic value. It is argued here that the first problem does not pose a serious threat to large classes of interesting practices. The bulk of the paper is devoted to the computational problem, which, it is submitted, can be addressed in promising terms by means of computer simulation. In an attempt to add vividness to this proposal, an up-and-running simulation environment (Laputa) is presented and put to some preliminary tests.

An Epistemological Criticism of Social Entrepreneurship: Is Social Entrepreneurship a Sound Scientific Field of Research

2018 ◽  
Author(s):  
Amir Forouharfar
Keyword(s):  
Social Entrepreneurship ◽  
Social Constructivism ◽  
Social Epistemology ◽  
American English ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Research Question ◽  
Knowledge Structure ◽  
Scientific Field ◽  
The Other ◽  
First Time

The paper was shaped around the pivotal question: Is SE a sound and scientific field of research? The question has given a critical tone to the paper and has also helped to bring out some of the controversial debates in the realm of SE. The paper was organized under five main discussions to be able to provide a scientific answer to the research question: (1)<b> </b>is “social entrepreneurship” an oxymoron?, (2) the characteristics of SE knowledge, (3) sources of social entrepreneurship knowledge, (4) SE knowledge: structure and limitations and (5) contributing epistemology-making concepts for SE.<b> </b>Based on the sections,<b> </b>the study relied on the relevant philosophical schools of thought in <i>Epistemology </i>(e.g. <i>Empiricism</i>, <i>Rationalism</i>, <i>Skepticism</i>, <i>Internalism</i> vs. <i>Externalism</i>,<i> Essentialism, Social Constructivism</i>, <i>Social Epistemology, etc.</i>) to discuss these controversies around SE and proposes some solutions by reviewing SE literature. Also, to determine the governing linguistic discourse in the realm of SE, which was necessary for our discussion,<i> Corpus of Contemporary American English (COCA)</i> for the first time in SE studies was used. Further, through the study, SE buzzwords which constitute SE terminology were derived and introduced to help us narrowing down and converging the thoughts in this field and demarking the epistemological boundaries of SE. The originality of the paper on one hand lies in its pioneering discussions on SE epistemology and on the other hand in paving the way for a construction of sound epistemology for SE; therefore in many cases after preparing the philosophical ground for the discussions, it went beyond the prevalent SE literature through meta-analysis to discuss the cases which were raised. The results of the study verified previously claimed embryonic pre-paradigmatic phase in SE which was far from a sound and scientific knowledge, although the scholarly endeavors are the harbingers of such a possibility in the future which calls for further mature academic discussion and development of SE knowledge by the SE academia.

Cultivating Reason

2017 ◽  
Author(s):  
Harvey Siegel
Keyword(s):  
Critical Thinking ◽  
Philosophy Of Science ◽  
Social Epistemology ◽  
Historical Record ◽  
Philosophical Tradition ◽  
Epistemic Dependence ◽  
Philosophical Work ◽  
Western Philosophical Tradition ◽  
Educational Ideal

The Western philosophical tradition has historically valorized the cultivation of reason as a fundamental intellectual ideal. This ideal continues to be defended by many as educationally basic. However, recent philosophical work has challenged it on several fronts, including worries stemming from relativistic tendencies in the philosophy of science, the apparent ubiquity of epistemic dependence in social epistemology, and broad critiques of objectionable hegemony launched from feminist and postmodernist perspectives. This chapter briefly reviews the historical record, connects the cultivation of reason to the educational ideal of critical thinking, spells out the latter ideal, and evaluates these challenges. It ends by sketching a general, “transcendental” reply to all such critiques of reason.

Testimonial Smothering and Domestic Violence Disclosure in Clinical Contexts

Episteme ◽  
2021 ◽  
pp. 1-18
Author(s):  
Jack Warman
Keyword(s):  
Public Health ◽  
Domestic Violence ◽  
Recent Work ◽  
Social Epistemology ◽  
Empirical Work ◽  
Health Sciences ◽  
Epistemic Injustice ◽  
Global Public Health ◽  
Personal Histories ◽  
Domestic Violence And Abuse

Abstract Domestic violence and abuse (DVA) are at last coming to be recognised as serious global public health problems. Nevertheless, many women with personal histories of DVA decline to disclose them to healthcare practitioners. In the health sciences, recent empirical work has identified many factors that impede DVA disclosure, known as barriers to disclosure. Drawing on recent work in social epistemology on testimonial silencing, we might wonder why so many people withhold their testimony and whether there is some kind of epistemic injustice afoot here. In this paper, I offer some philosophical reflections on DVA disclosure in clinical contexts and the associated barriers to disclosure. I argue that women with personal histories of DVA are vulnerable to a certain form of testimonial injustice in clinical contexts, namely, testimonial smothering, and that this may help to explain why they withhold that testimony. It is my contention that this can help explain the low rates of DVA disclosure by patients to healthcare practitioners.

scholarly journals The Independence Thesis: When Individual and Social Epistemology Diverge*

2011 ◽  
Vol 78 (4) ◽  
pp. 653-677 ◽  
Author(s):  
Conor Mayo-Wilson ◽  
Kevin J. S. Zollman ◽  
David Danks
Keyword(s):  
Social Epistemology
Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document