Decision-Based Epistemology: sketching a systematic framework of Feyerabend’s metaphilosophy

Author:

Kuby DanielORCID

Abstract

AbstractIn this paper I defend the claim that Paul Feyerabend held a robust metaphilosophical position for most of his philosophical career. This position I call Decision-Based Epistemology and reconstruct it in terms of three key components: (1) a form of epistemic voluntarism concerning the justification of philosophical positions and (2) a behaviorist account of philosophical beliefs, which allows him (3) to cast normative arguments concerning philosophical beliefs in scientific methodology, such as realism, in terms of means-ends relations. I then introduce non-naturalist and naturalist variants of his conception of normativity, which I trace back to his mentors Viktor Kraft and Karl Popper, respectively. This distinction, introduced on the metaphilosophical level, can can be put to use to explain key changes in Feyerabend’s philosophical proposals, such as the viability of his methodological argument for realism. I conclude that this Decision-Based Epistemology should be further explored by historically embedding Feyerabend’s metaphilosophy in a voluntarist tradition of scientific philosophy.

Funder

Austrian Science Fund

Volkswagen Foundation

Publisher

Springer Science and Business Media LLC

Subject

General Social Sciences,Philosophy

Reference77 articles.

1. Brown, M. J. (2016). The abundant world: Paul Feyerabend’s metaphysics of science. Studies in History and Philosophy of Science Part A, 57, 142–154. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.shpsa.2015.11.015.

2. Carus, A. W. (2007). Carnap and twentieth-century thought: Explication as enlightenment. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

3. Chakravartty, A. (2017). Scientific ontology: Integrating naturalized metaphysics and voluntarist epistemology (1st ed.). Oxford: Oxford University Press.

4. Chignell, A. (2018). The ethics of belief. In E. N. Zalta (Ed.), The Stanford encyclopedia of philosophy (Spring 2018 Edition). https://plato.stanford.edu/archives/spr2018/entries/ethics-belief.

5. Collodel, M. (2016). Was Feyerabend a Popperian? Methodological issues in the history of the philosophy of science. Studies in History and Philosophy of Science, 57, 27–56.

Cited by 2 articles. 订阅此论文施引文献 订阅此论文施引文献,注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献,订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献

同舟云学术

1.学者识别学者识别

2.学术分析学术分析

3.人才评估人才评估

"同舟云学术"是以全球学者为主线,采集、加工和组织学术论文而形成的新型学术文献查询和分析系统,可以对全球学者进行文献检索和人才价值评估。用户可以通过关注某些学科领域的顶尖人物而持续追踪该领域的学科进展和研究前沿。经过近期的数据扩容,当前同舟云学术共收录了国内外主流学术期刊6万余种,收集的期刊论文及会议论文总量共计约1.5亿篇,并以每天添加12000余篇中外论文的速度递增。我们也可以为用户提供个性化、定制化的学者数据。欢迎来电咨询!咨询电话:010-8811{复制后删除}0370

www.globalauthorid.com

TOP

Copyright © 2019-2024 北京同舟云网络信息技术有限公司
京公网安备11010802033243号  京ICP备18003416号-3