Norms, Naturalism and Epistemology: The Case for Science Without Norms

Palgrave (2003)
  Copy   BIBTEX

Abstract

Jonathan Knowles argues against theories that seek to provide specific norms for the formation of belief on the basis of empirical sources: the project of naturalized epistemology. He argues that such norms are either not genuinely normative for belief, or are not required for optimal belief formation. An exhaustive classification of such theories is motivated and each variety is discussed in turn. He distinguishes naturalized epistemology from the less committal idea of naturalism, which provides a sense in which we can achieve epistemic normativity without norms.

Other Versions

No versions found

Links

PhilArchive



    Upload a copy of this work     Papers currently archived: 100,752

External links

Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server

Through your library

Analytics

Added to PP
2012-02-14

Downloads
46 (#478,781)

6 months
2 (#1,686,488)

Historical graph of downloads
How can I increase my downloads?

Author's Profile

Citations of this work

How Successful is Naturalism?Georg Gasser (ed.) - 2007 - Frankfurt: Ontos Verlag.
What's really wrong with Laudan's normative naturalism.Jonathan Knowles - 2002 - International Studies in the Philosophy of Science 16 (2):171 – 186.
Making Naturalised Epistemology (Slightly) Normative.Marcin Miłkowski - 2010 - In Marcin Młlkowski & Konrad Talmont-Kaminski (eds.), Beyond Description. Naturalism and Normativity. College Publications.
Ways of Integrating HPS: Top-down, Bottom-up, and Iterations.Kye Palider - 2021 - In Paul E. Patton (ed.), Scientonomy and the sociotechnical domain. Willmington, Delaware: Vernon Press. pp. 21-40.

Add more citations

References found in this work

No references found.

Add more references