Knowledge Tree
Relations (1)
related 2.32 — strongly supporting 4 facts
The concept of justification is central to the debate surrounding naturalized epistemology, as seen in [1]'s focus on how justification is anchored in the natural world and [2]'s argument that naturalization threatens the normative status required for justification. Furthermore, [3] and [4] highlight how critics like Jaegwon Kim analyze the relationship between traditional justification and the causal, non-epistemic properties emphasized by naturalized epistemology.
Facts (4)
Sources
Naturalized Epistemology - Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy plato.stanford.edu 2 facts
claimJaegwon Kim argues that Willard Van Orman Quine's naturalized epistemology studies a different topic than traditional epistemology, specifically shifting focus from questions of rationality, justification, and knowledge to the causal connections between sensory evidence and beliefs.
quoteJaegwon Kim stated in his 1988 critical discussion of Quine's 'Naturalized Epistemology': '...if a belief is justified, that must be so because it has certain factual, non-epistemic properties...That it is a justified belief cannot be a brute fundamental fact... [it] must be grounded in the factual descriptive properties of that particular belief.'
Epistemology - Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy plato.stanford.edu 1 fact
claimA moderate version of naturalistic epistemology aims to identify how knowledge and justification are anchored in the natural world, similar to how physics explains natural phenomena like heat or thunder.
Naturalized epistemology - Wikipedia en.wikipedia.org 1 fact
perspectiveHilary Putnam argues that replacing traditional epistemology with naturalized epistemology would eliminate the normative, which is necessary for concepts like justification, rational acceptability, and warranted assertibility.