Contemporary Epistemology and its Critics: on Crisis and Perspectives

Publication Type:

Language:

Transliteration of original Title: 
Sovremennaya epistemologiya i ee kritiki: o krizisakh i perspektivakh
Author(s): 
Ilya T. Kasavin
Russian Academy of Sciences, Institute of Philosophy, Lobachevsky State University of Nizhni Novgorod.
Vladimir N. Porus
National Research University “Higher School of Economics”
Issue number: 
No.4 (Vol.55)
Pages: 
8–25
Abstract: 

The article considers the basic arguments of some “critics of epistemology”, according to which the philosophical analysis of the problems associated with the processes of cognition (including science) should be eventually replaced by the study of these problems by means of special cognitive sciences. It is shown that these arguments are in part incorrect and in part can be seen as an indication of the real difficulties in the modern philosophy of cognition. A future philosophical epistemology is associated with the reform of its conceptual apparatus, the methodological arsenal and problem field. An interaction between epistemology and the sciences dealing with cognition is the only and necessary way of development for philosophical epistemology. There are two ways of such interaction. Firstly, there is an analysis of scientific discussions, on the basis of which one identifies new opportunities to overcome the well-known philosophical controversies (between rationalism and empiricism, realism and constructivism, fundamentalism and relativism, etc.). On this way, epistemology moves into a position of horizontal moderation of interdisciplinary discourse and creates a trading (Harry Collins). Secondly, epistemology provides a rational criticism of the foundations of special sciences, and selects semantic levels in the content of its own categories (truth, rationality, agent, object, etc.) referring to different cognitive practices. These practices are evaluated normatively in terms of a value perspective of modern culture. Both ways are complementary to each other.

Keywords: 
epistemology, cognitive sciences, agent, history of science, contextualism, realism, constructivism, epistemological enactivism
References: 

Abdildin, Zh. M., Bazhanov, V. A., Vasil’ev, V. V., Kasavin, I. T., Mironov, V. V., Bykova, M. F. “Otvety na voprosy ankety” [Replies to Questions], Voprosy filosofii, 2017, no. 7, pp. 28–38. (In Russian)

Ajdukevich, K., Porus, V. N. (transl.). “Problema transcendentalnogo idealizma v semanticheskoi formulirovke” [The Problem of Transcendental Idealism in Semantic Formulation], in: Istoriya filosofii [History of Philosophy], no. 5. Moscow: IPh RAN Publ., 2000, pp. 154–171. (In Russian)

Ajdukiewicz, К. “Problemat transcendentalnego idealismu w sformulowaniu semantycznym”, Przegląd Filozoficzny, 1937, vol. XL, pp. 271–287.

Astahov, S. S. “Metafizicheskaya interpretaciya aktorno-setevoy teorii i ee ogranicheniya” [A Metaphysical Interpretation of the Actor-Network Theory and Its Limitations], Gumanitarnye issledovaniya v Vostochnoj Sibiri i na Dalnem Vostoke [The Humanities in Eastern Siberia and far East], 2015, no. 3, pp. 122– 128. (In Russian)

Berger, P., Luckmann, Th. The Social Construction of Reality: A treatise in the sociology of knowledge. New York: Anchor Books, 1966. 219 pp.

Berger, P., Lukmann, T. Socialnoe konstruirovanie realnosti. Traktat po sociologii znaniya [The Social Construction of Reality]. Moscow: Medium, 1995. 323 pp. (In Russian)

Brushlinskiy, A. V. Subjekt: myshlenie, uchenie, voobrazhenie [Agent, Thinking, Education, Imagination]. Moscow; Voronezh: NPO “Modehk”, 1996. 392 pp. (In Russian)

Collins, H., Evans, R. “Interactional expertise and the imitation game”, in: M. E. Gorman (ed.). Trading Zones and Interactional Expertise: Creating New Kinds of Collaboration. Cambridge: MIT Press, 2010. 312 pp.

Davidson, D. “On the Very Idea of a Conceptual Scheme”, in: Proceedings and Addresses of the American Philosophical Association, 1973–1974, vol. 47, pp. 5–20.

Dewey, J. The Quest for Certainty. A Study of the Relation of Knowledge and Action. New York: George Allen & Unwin LTD., 1929. 302 pp.

Dewey, J., Bentley, A. Knowing and the Known. Boston: Beacon Press. 1949. 334 pp.

Engels, F. Anti-During, in: Marks, K., Engels, F. Sochineniya [Works],vol. 20. Moscow: Politizdat, 1961, pp. 5–342. (In Russian)

Feyerabend, P. K. “Philosophy of Science: A Subject with a Great Past /Historical & Philosophical Perspectives of Science”, in: Roger H. Stuewer (ed.).Minnesota Studies in Philosophy of Sciencevol. 5. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press, 1970, pp. 172–184.

Harre, R. Konstrukcionizm i osnovaniya znaniya [Constructionism and the Basis of Knowledge], in: Lektorskiy, V. A. (ed.). Konstruktivistskiy podhod v ehpistemologii i naukah o cheloveke [Constructivist Approach in the Humanities]. Moscow: Kanon+, 2009, pp. 64–78. (In Russian)

Kasavin, I. T. (ed.). Sotsialnaya epistemologiya. Idei, metody, programmy[Social Epistemology. Ideas, Methods, Programms]. Moscow: Kanon+, ROOI “Reabilitatsiya”, 2010. 712 pp. (In Russian)

Kasavin, I. T. “The Koiné of Science: Interdisciplinarity and Mediation”,Herald of the Russian Academy of Sciences, 2017, vol. 89, no. 6, pp. 543–550.

Knyazeva, E. N. “Koncepciya inaktivirovannogo poznaniya: istoricheskie predposylki i perspektivy razvitiya”, in: I. P. Merkulova (ed.). Evolyuciya. Myshlenie. Soznanie [Evolution. Thinking. Consciousness]. Moscow: Kanon+, 2004, pp. 308–349. (In Russian)

Knyazeva, E. N. Enaktivizm: novaya forma konstruktivizma v epistemologii[Enactivism: A New Form of Constructivism in Epistemology]. Moscow, St. Petersburg: Centr gumanitarnyh initsiativ; Universitetskaya kniga, 2014. 352 pp. (In Russian)

Latour, B. Peresborka socialnogo: vvedenie v aktorno-setevuyu teoriyu[Reassembling the Social: An Introduction to Actor-Network Theory]. Moscow: HSE Publ., 2014. 382 pp. (In Russian)

Latour, B. Reassembling the Social: an Introduction to Actor-Network Theory. Oxford, New York: Oxford University Press, 2005. 301 рp.

Lektorskiy, V. A. “Realizm, antirealizm, konstruktivizm i konstruktivnyj realizm v sovremennoj ehpistemologii i nauke” [Realism, Anti-Realism, Consctructivism and Constructive Realism in Contemporary Social Epistemology and Science], in: Lektorskiy, V. A. (ed.). Konstruktivistskiy podhod v ehpistemologii i naukah o cheloveke [Constructivist Approach in the Humanities]. Moscow: Kanon+, 2009, pp. 5–40. (In Russian)

Porus, V. N. “Filosofiya – prostranstvo svobody” [Philosophy is the Space for Freedom], Filosofiya i kul’tura – Philosophy and Culture, 2011, no. 7, pp. 62–71. (In Russian)

Reichenbach, H., Logunov, A. A. (transl. ed.). Filosofiya prostranstva i vremeni [Philosophie der Raum-Zeit-Lehre]. Moscow: Progress, 1985. 344 pp. (In Russian)

Rescher, N. Methodological Pragmatism. A Systems-Theoretic Approach to the Theory of Knowledge. Oxford: OUP, 1977. 330 рp.

Rorty, R. “The World Well Lost”, Journal of Philosophy, 1972, vol. 69, pp. 649–666.

DOI: 
10.5840/eps201855461
Full Text: