If Roderick Chisholm's criteria for naturalistically acceptable terms are accepted, it is unclear why epistemic terms like 'supports' are excluded from that list, suggesting that if they were included, epistemic support facts could be considered natural facts.

Authors

• Person: Not available Organization: Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy
  Naturalized Epistemology - Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy

Sources

• Naturalized Epistemology - Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy plato.stanford.edu Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy via serper

Referenced by nodes (2)

• natural facts concept
• Roderick M. Chisholm entity