Questions tagged [epistemology]

Epistemology is the study of knowledge, acquisition thereof, and the justification of belief in a given claim.

Epistemology is a study of knowledge and belief that complements formal, propositional logic.

  • This field of inquiry delves into what knowledge is and what it can't be
    • Epistemology seeks to understand the relationship of things we claim to know to things we think we know, but may be mistaking 'unjustified belief' for 'knowledge'
    • Typically this will deal with the content of a belief, not the claim directly
  • It further explores what methods we use to accumulate knowledge
    • Epistemic evaluation of the rationale for collecting knowledge is based on understanding what methods and data support a given claim
    • Typically this will deal with the type of research
  • Epistemology also seeks out how to evaluate the weight given to claims of knowledge
    • Frequently, one will see qualifications like "Justified True Belief" (JTB) and similar measures of a claim's epistemic status under some scope of certainty
    • Typically this will deal with the type of claim

Questions for Philosophy Stackexchange that are tagged with should indicate the specific thread of epistemological inquiry is involved with a given area. For instance, check out the emboldened key words as they flag what the question is asking:

By which methods is it possible to evaluate a claim about a teapot in a place that neither I, nor any other person, nor any possible current technology can access? What kinds of claims to knowledge can be made about such a teapot? How can these types of claims and the consequent claims be exported to a conversation about something else?

  • When answering questions in this vein try to stick to the key word and answer in line with it. Try to outline the secondary expectations for the given area.

  • When editing a question that is embedded with epistemic assumptions, refer back to these key words to straighten it up for more rigorous answers.

1813 questions
49
votes
10 answers

Why should one accept trivial claims without evidence?

There are certain claims that I accept as obviously true without (much) evidence. For example: Most people don't like to be hit on the head with a hammer. Donald Trump ate dinner some time last week. There has yet to be a whale on the moon. I…
Rebecca J. Stones
  • 941
  • 1
  • 7
  • 13
30
votes
9 answers

When is absence of evidence not evidence of absence?

"Absence of evidence is not evidence of absence." I think this statement raises some kind of epistemic problem. Like, how are we supposed to conclude the potential non-existence of something, like Santa Claus or dragons?
vorpal professor
  • 559
  • 1
  • 4
  • 6
15
votes
7 answers

How do animals think if they don't speak a language?

The way we humans think and reason involves us using words to describe things. Even when thinking in our heads, we use words to think. This begs the question, how do animals who don't understand a language think?
mdlp0716
  • 329
  • 1
  • 2
  • 8
15
votes
1 answer

Can you suggest a good introduction on epistemology and also some criticism on them?

I bought Epistemology, by Richard Fumerton and Epistemology: A Contemporary Introduction, by Robert Audi. Can you suggest other titles and also some criticism on them?
Red Banana
  • 1,358
  • 1
  • 11
  • 25
14
votes
4 answers

What epistemological systems effectively handle the infinite regress?

I have been following apologetics for quite some time and have run into many claims that certain epistemological methods typically associated with non-theism (for example, empiricism and logical positivism) do not handle things like the infinite…
Hendy
  • 391
  • 2
  • 5
12
votes
13 answers

How can experts disagree despite having access to the same facts?

How is it possible that experts in a certain field can disagree despite given access to the same facts? For example in science, why is there disagreement when given access to the exact same information? Shouldn't the scientific method correct the…
Michael
  • 221
  • 1
  • 2
  • 7
11
votes
6 answers

Can radical skepticism be refuted?

The conclusion of an epistemology course I took a few months ago was that radical skepticism can never be refuted because the skeptic chose the radical approach. We can never prove him wrong because he can just doubt in the validity of method we use…
ninek
  • 201
  • 3
  • 8
9
votes
1 answer

What are the most important papers regarding the epistemic significance of disagreement?

There's been a debate recently about what is the right way to react to learning that you disagree with someone you take to be your epistemic peer. One approach is the "Equal Weight View". I associate the names Kelly and Christensen with this topic,…
Seamus
  • 1,603
  • 9
  • 13
9
votes
4 answers

Epistemic justification - 'turtles all the way down'?

There's an age old problem (though I'm not sure of it's age exactly) regarding epistemic justification: how can I be justified in anything that I know to be true, even a principle as basic as modus ponens? After all, when I say Given: If P then…
That Guy
  • 1,925
  • 1
  • 17
  • 25
8
votes
7 answers

Do we know whether we know something?

Intuitively, it seems pretty obvious that, for a given proposition p, we know whether or not we know p. I am not sure how to express this more formally (e.g. as a property of the relevant epistemic accessibility relation). I remember that belief, as…
anon
7
votes
3 answers

Can we justify anything without resorting to 'a priori' truths?

Without a clear answer to the infinite regress problem, can we justify anything without resorting to 'a priori' truths? And if not, how is there a reliable standard for testing the validity of a priori reasoning?
Fresheyeball
  • 200
  • 7
7
votes
2 answers

What kind of things do we actually know about teapots?

This question is not meant to deal with the religious side of the Teapot (or FSM or the Invisible Pink Unicorn), but rather the inherent epistemological claims and their export to other areas of knowledge. With respect solely to the epistemic; By…
mfg
  • 857
  • 1
  • 7
  • 20
7
votes
3 answers

Is a priori and a posteriori knowledge objective or subjective?

In a description of David Hume, examples of a priori and a posteriori are given: a posteriori: "Dogs are carnivores" a priori: "Bachelors are unmarried" I am having trouble differentiating between the two statements. "Bachelors are unmarried" is a…
leancz
  • 789
  • 1
  • 8
  • 18
7
votes
1 answer

Assumption About What Could Make A Belief Justified

I was reading the IEP's article on epistemic justification, and came across the following paragraph(s): https://iep.utm.edu/epi-just/#SH1a I'm having a hard time with the sentence "Proposition 3 is not justified unless Propositions 1 and 2 are…
sidkol
  • 91
  • 5
6
votes
6 answers

Memory and self

How do I know that the subject of my memories and me are the same person? I have a memory of waking up this morning. How do I know that the subject who woke up and the subject remembering it are the same person?
1
2 3
9 10