Introduction to the Study of the History of Epistemology

2016 ◽  
Author(s):  
Andrej Démuth
Author(s):  
Scott MacDonald

At the heart of Augustine’s intellectual and spiritual autobiography is a search for wisdom that demands of him sophisticated epistemological reflection. The results—in particular, his identification of the category of rational or justified assent on less-than-certain grounds and his inquiry into the nature and epistemic value of testimony—break dramatic new ground in the history of epistemology. He articulates a concept of belief (as assent to a proposition on the basis of testimony) and distinguishes it from understanding (assent to a proposition on the basis of reasoned insight). Exploiting that distinction, he develops both a rationale for and a detailed account of a systematic method for the rational investigation of theological matters, which he characterizes as belief seeking understanding. Augustine’s famous reflections on the paradox of evil and on the nature of the divine Trinity provide compelling illustrations of his application of this rational method and its results.


Author(s):  
Daniel Andriessen

Knowledge management is about the management of knowledge. Therefore many texts on knowledge management (KM) start with trying to explain or define what knowledge is (Nonaka & Takeuchi, 1995; Krogh, Ichijo, & Nonaka, 2000; McKenzie & Van Winkelen, 2004). As the history of epistemology shows, this debate is over 2000 years old. Some claim the debate is crucial for knowledge management, and they make a clear distinction between data, information and knowledge (Butler, 2006). Others state that it is “not essential to the fundamental mission of knowledge management” (Schwartz, 2006, p. 10). This article argues that for KM it is not important how knowledge is defined but how it is conceptualized.


1969 ◽  
Vol 2 (1) ◽  
pp. 30-33
Author(s):  
Gerd Wolandt ◽  

Author(s):  
Jonathan L. Kvanvig

This chapter argues that the literature surrounding the Gettier Problem arises from a kind of methodological false consciousness in the epistemology of the middle part of the twentieth century. The underlying methodology is contrasted with two paradigms within the history of epistemology: one prompted by the conversational context of scrapes with the skeptic and the other on the scientific project of trying to understand the universe and our place in it. These competing paradigms call for two quite different epistemological projects and we can separate the two projects in a way that sees them as complementary, unlike the picture that emerges from within the presuppositions of the Gettier literature. The resulting picture does not make the Gettier Problem go away, but implies a weaker claim, that it should not now be and never should have been a primary focus of epistemology.


Pyrrhonian skepticism is defined by its commitment to inquiry. The Greek work skepsis means inquiry—not doubt, or whatever else later forms of skepticism took to be at the core of skeptical philosophy. The book proposes that Sextus Empiricus’s legacy in the history of epistemology is that he developed an epistemology of inquiry. The volume’s authors investigate epistemology after Sextus, both ways in which he has influenced the history of philosophy and ways in which he and the Pyrrhonian tradition he represents ought to contribute to contemporary debates. As a whole, the book aims to (re)instate Sextus as an important philosopher in these discussions in much the same way that Aristotle has been brought into discussions in contemporary ethics, action theory, and metaphysics. Sextus provides a fresh take on contemporary debates because he approaches issues of perception, disagreement, induction, and ignorance from the perspective of inquiry. The volume’s contributions address four core themes of Sextus’s skepticism: (1) appearances and perception, (2) the structure of justification and proof, (3) belief and ignorance, and (4) ethics and action. These themes are explored in some historical authors whose work relates to Sextus, including Peripatetic logicians, Locke, Hume, Nietzsche, and German idealists; and they are explored as they figure in today’s epistemology, philosophy of mind, philosophy of language, and ethics.


Author(s):  
Maria Rosa Antognazza

Abstract Drawing inspiration from a well-attested historical tradition, I propose an account of cognition according to which knowledge is not only prior to belief; it is also, and crucially, not a kind of belief. Believing, in turn, is not some sort of botched knowing, but a mental state fundamentally different from knowing, with its own distinctive and complementary role in our cognitive life. I conclude that the main battle-line in the history of epistemology is drawn between the affirmation of a natural mental state in which there is a contact between ‘mind’ and ‘reality’ (whatever the ontological nature of this ‘reality’) and the rejection of such a natural mental state. For the former position, there is a mental state which is different in kind from belief, and which is constituted by the presence of the object of cognition to the cognitive subject, with no gap between them. For the latter position, all our cognition is belief, and the question becomes how and when belief is permissible.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document