Upload
clark-sanders
View
103
Download
3
Embed Size (px)
DESCRIPTION
Social Epistemology. The Cognitive Robinson Crusoe. The Individualistic Epistemology. Assumptions and problems of „individualistic” („traditional”) epistemology: Epistemic agents are individual human beings. - PowerPoint PPT Presentation
Citation preview
Péter Hartl & Dr. Tihamér MargitayDept. of Philosophy and the History of Science
1111 Budapest, Egry J. st. 1. E [email protected]
Social Epistemology
Filozófiai és Tudománytörténet Tanszék
23.04.24. Hartl & Margitay – Epistemology
The Cognitive Robinson Crusoe
Filozófiai és Tudománytörténet Tanszék
23.04.24. Hartl & Margitay – Epistemology
The Individualistic Epistemology Assumptions and problems of „individualistic” („traditional”) epistemology:
Epistemic agents are individual human beings.
What are the desidered conginitve states (e.g. knowledge) and methods leading to those states (e.g. justification) ?
The standards of knowledge and rationality are universal and objective.
Knowledge represents the world / aims at truth (correspondence).
What can an isolated subject know – should believe -- entirely on her own when her resources are her senses and the contents of her mind?
In principle, an individual can know everything that can be known by a community, practically, of course, she cannot.
Filozófiai és Tudománytörténet Tanszék
23.04.24. Hartl & Margitay – Epistemology
The social and interpersonal aspects of knowledge
Social Epistemology
Filozófiai és Tudománytörténet Tanszék
23.04.24. Hartl & Margitay – Epistemology
Forms of changes: Adding assumptions (resources) and problems
Replacing assumptions and problems
From Individualistic to Social Epistemology
Filozófiai és Tudománytörténet Tanszék
23.04.24. Hartl & Margitay – Epistemology
How to make social from individual epistemology?
What sort of modifications of the individualistic epistemology are necessary? What kind of phenomena should be taken into consideration? And WHY?
Question: Do-It-Yourself Social Epistemology
Filozófiai és Tudománytörténet Tanszék
23.04.24. Hartl & Margitay – Epistemology
Testimony
Peer agreement and disagreement
Argumentation
Social norms of knowledge and rationality
Etc..
Filozófiai és Tudománytörténet Tanszék
23.04.24. Hartl & Margitay – Epistemology
Under what conditions can a testimony be relied on? Different answers:
A cognitive agent can rely on it if she has further non-testimonial physical evidence about the reliability of the speaker. (the agent’s evidence, expanded content -- individualistic epistemology)
Variation: By default, she can accept them unless she has contrary evidence (defeater). (the agent’s evidence, expanded content -- individualistic epistemology)
Example: Testimony, Individualistic Accounts
Filozófiai és Tudománytörténet Tanszék
23.04.24. Hartl & Margitay – Epistemology
Under what conditions can a testimony be relied on? Different answers:
The cognitive agent, s can accept what t says if t knows what she says. That is if s knows by testimony that p, then someone else should know p first. (transindividual evidence, society of knowers – social epistemology)
The cognitive agent can accept a testimony if she is convinced in a rational debate that it is acceptable. (transindividual method of justification – social epistemology) New problems: what sort of soc. methods are admissible?
The cog agent can accept a testimony if she has social evidence (social indicator-properties) about the speaker’s credibility. E.g. I accept that helicobacter causes stomach ulcer, because I heard it from distinguished scientists. (social evidence – social epistemology) New problems: what sort of indicators are reliable? What social procedures can screen credibility? etc..
Example: Testimony, Social Accounts
Filozófiai és Tudománytörténet Tanszék
23.04.24. Hartl & Margitay – Epistemology
It is a community that generates and acquires knowledge not individuals. Members of a community share beliefs, cognitive methods and practices.
They rely on each other's testimony.
Only community can maintain norms.
Two cognitive agents: community (most fundamental), individuals.
What are the epistemic properties, methods and practices of collective epistemic agents?
One More Radical Step: the Collective Agent
Filozófiai és Tudománytörténet Tanszék
23.04.24. Hartl & Margitay – Epistemology
A radical example of social epistemology is the sociology of knowledge. („the strong program” of Bloor 1976)
Example
Filozófiai és Tudománytörténet Tanszék
23.04.24. Hartl & Margitay – Epistemology
Historical evidence:
History of science and ideas shows how sociological and psychological contingencies actually played a role in what people come to beleive.
Theoretical arguments for the need of social (psychological) factors:
Underdetermination (Duhem, Quine): Logically incompatible theories may fit all possible evidence. Theories are underdetermiend by evidence: How to bridge the evidential gap? Why one theory is preferred over another?
Epistmological holism (Duhem, Quine): Whole theories (together with background assumptions) are the units of test (confirmation or falsification). What claims to revise/to save?
Semantic holism (Quine): Language as a whole has meaninig, meanings cannot be attached to words separetelly. Theory-ladenness of observation: How to choose evidence?
Arguments for the Sociological Approach
Filozófiai és Tudománytörténet Tanszék
23.04.24. Hartl & Margitay – Epistemology
„…knowledge for the sciologist is whatever men take to be knowledge… beliefs which are taken for granted, institutionlized, or invested with authority…”
Great variety of ideas – „…what are the causes of this variation, how and why does it change?”
To EXPLAIN the production, transmission, change, structure and organization of knowledge within a particular group of people E.g.:
What is believed?
Who believes it and who does not?
Why do they believe it? What are their sources, what are the sources of the creditbility?
How are these beliefs defended against doubt?
Etc.
The Strong Program
Filozófiai és Tudománytörténet Tanszék
23.04.24. Hartl & Margitay – Epistemology
Methodology: Causal Explanation Social and psychological causes bringing about beleifs, to be found in:
Process of socialization, transmittion of culture
Goals and interests of the members of the group
Ways of generating consensus
Rethorical and negotiation processes
Conventions
Etc.
Impartial explanation: both truth and falsity require explanation (not merely a sociology of error)
Symmetrical explanation: the same typ of cause for truth and fasity (not merely a sociology of error)
Reflexivity: the same exaplains the sociology of knowledge itself.
Filozófiai és Tudománytörténet Tanszék
23.04.24. Hartl & Margitay – Epistemology
Sociology, social psychology, social anthropology:
Methodology: Practice
Filozófiai és Tudománytörténet Tanszék
23.04.24. Hartl & Margitay – Epistemology
Radical Socialitzation of EpistemologyIndividualistic Epistemology Epistemic agents are individual
human beings.
What are the desidered conginitve states (e.g. knowledge) and methods leading to those states (e.g. justification) ?
The standards of knowledge and rationality are universal and objective.
Knowledge represents the world/aims at truth (correpondence).
Sociology of Knowledge Collective epistemic agent
What is taken to be knowledge, how is it produced and maintained
No universalstandards of rationality
Knowledge „represents” consensus
Naturalized inquire into knowledge, the science of knowledge