ARE NATURALIZED EPISTEMOLOGY AND EVOLUTIONISM COMPATIBLE?

Publication Type:

Language:

Transliteration of original Title: 
Sovmestimy li naturalizovannaya epistemologiya i evolyutsionizm?
Author(s): 
Alexander Khramov
Paleontology Institute of Russian Academy of Sciences
Issue number: 
No. 2 (Vol. 36)
Pages: 
161-177
Abstract: 

The naturalistic approach to the justification of knowledge and its compatibility with evolutionism are discussed in the present study. Naturalists want to establish reliability of our cognitive faculties by reference to natural selection. But according to the evolutionary argument against naturalism, which was suggested by Alvin Plantinga, if our cognitive apparatus has been produced by the blind evolutionary process, its reliability would be low. Author elaborates this argument and argues that we should admit failure of naturalized epistemology or return to the teleogical world-view.

Keywords: 
naturalism, knowledge, evolutionism, cognition
References: 

Antonovskiy A.Yu. Niklas Luman: epistemologicheskoe vvedenie v teoriyu sotsial'nykh sistem (Niklas Luhmann: epistemic introduction into the theory of social systems). Moscow, 2007.

Antonovskiy A.Yu. Semantic contextualism and the problem of non-standard definition of knowledge (Semanticheskiy kontekstualizm i problema nestandartnogo opredeleniya znaniya).  Epistemologiya i filosofiya nauki - Epistemology and philosophy of science. №4. 2010. Str. 101-118. 

Aristotel'.  “O dushe” (Aristotle. “On soul”).  Sochineniya v chetyrekh tomakh. T.1. (Works in four volumes. Vol.1). Moscow, 1976.

Aristotel'. Fizika (Aristotle. Physics). Moscow, 2007.

Borisyak A.A.  V.O.Kovalevskiy, ego zhizn' i nauchnye Trudy (V.O. Kovalevsky, his life and scientific work). L.,1928.

Chisolm R. Theory of Knowledge, 3rd ed. NJ, 1996.

Feldman R. Naturalism in epistemology.  EurAmerica. V.28. 1998. Pp.1-38.

Galen K. O naznachenii chastey chelovecheskogo tela (Galen K. About purpose of parts of a human body). Moscow, 1971.

Goldman A. A Priori Warrant and Naturalistic Epistemology.  Noûs. V.33. 1999. Pp.1-28.

Goldman A. Why Social Epistemology is Real Epistemology.  Social Epistemology. Oxford, 2010. Pp.1-28.

Gould S.J. Wonderful Life: The Burgess Shale and the Nature of History. N. Y., L., 1989. P.300.

Gould S.J., Lewontin R.C. The spandrels of San Marco and the Panglossian paradigm: a critique of the adaptationist program. Proc. Roy. Soc. London B. V.205. P.581-598.

Johansson L.G. Kant versus Quine: Transcendentalism or Naturalism?  Uppsala Philosophical Studies. V. 54. 2011. Pp. 115-128.

Kant I. Kritik der reinen Vernunft. Hamburg, 1956.

Kant I. Kritika chistogo razuma (Kant I. Critique of Pure Reason). Moscow, 2006.

Kornblith H. Introduction: What is Naturalistic Epistemology?  Naturalizing epistemology. Cambridge, 1994. Pp. 1-15.

Kornblith H. Knowledge and its Place in Nature. Oxford, 2002.

Kornblith H. Naturalizing Epistemology. Cambridge, 1987.

Kraft V. Venskiy kruzhok. Vozniknovenie neopozitivizma (Kraft V. The Vienna Circle. The origin  of neopositivism). Moscow, 2003.

Kuayn U.V.O. Slovo i ob"ekt (Quine W.O. Word and Object). Moscow, 2000.

Kvanvig J. Scientific Naturalism and the Value of Knowledge.  Knowledge and Reality: Essays in Honor of Alvin Plantinga. Dordrecht, 2006. Pp. 193-214.

Kyuv'e Zh. O perevorotakh na poverkhnosti zemnogo shara (Cuvier J.O. upheavals on the surface of the globe.). Moscow, 1937.

Lektorskiy V.A. Epistemologiya klassicheskaya i neklassicheskaya (Classical and non-classical epistemology). Moscow, 2001.

Lektorskiy V.A. O probleme znaniya (On the problem of knowledge). Epistemologiya i filosofiya nauki - Epistemology and philosophy of science. № 3. 2009.

Lemos N. An Introduction to the Theory of Knowledge. Cambridge, 2007.

Luman N. Evolyutsiya (Luhmann. Evolution). Moscow, 2005.

Mamchur E.A. “Sushchestvuyut li granitsy sotsiologicheskogo podkhoda k analizu nauchnogo znaniya?”(“Are there limits to the sociological approach to the analysis of scientific knowledge?”).  Nauka: vozmozhnosti i granitsy (Science: possibilities and limits). Moscow, 2003.

Miller S.I., Fredericks M. Reliabilism «naturalized».  Social Epistemology. V.16. №4. 2002. Pp.367-376.

Naturalism Defeated? Essays on Plantinga's Evolutionary Argument Against Naturalism. N.Y., 2002

Plantinga A. Warrant and Proper Function. Oxford, 1993.

Plantinga A. Warrant: The Current Debate. N.Y., 1993.

Popper K. “K evolyutsionnoy teorii poznaniya”(Popper K.  “Campbell On evolutionary theory of knowledge”).  Evolyutsionnaya epistemologiya i logika sotsial'nykh nauk: Karl Poper i ego kritiki (Evolutionary epistemology and logic of the social sciences: Karl Popper and his critics). Moscow, 2006.

Popper K. Logika nauchnogo issledovaniya (Popper K. The logic of scientific research). Moscow, 2005.

Quine W.V. The Nature of Natural Knowledge.  Mind and Language. Oxford, 1975. Pp. 67-81.

Rockmore T. Naturalism as anti-kantianism (Rokmor T. Naturalizm kak antikantianstvo).  Epistemologiya i filosofiya nauki - Epistemology and philosophy of science. 2009. №4.

Roth P.A. Naturalizing Goldman.  The Southern Journal of Philosophy. V.37. 1999. Pp. 89-111 Johnsen B. How to Read «Epistemology Naturalized».  Journal of Philosophy. V. 102. 2005. Pp. 78-93.

Stepin V.S. Teoreticheskoe znanie. Struktura, istoricheskaya evolyutsiya (Theoretical knowledge. Structure, historical evolution). Moscow, 2003

Wedel M.J. A monument of inefficiency: The presumed course of the recurrent laryngeal nerve in sauropod dinosaurs.  Acta Palaeontologica Polonica. V. 57. 2012. Pp. 251-256.

Yum D. Traktat o chelovecheskoy prirode (Hume D, A Treatise of Human Nature.). Moscow, 2009.

Full Text: