Affiliation:
1. Department of Philosophy University of Navarra Pamplona Spain
Abstract
AbstractRik Peels's (2017) Fundamental Argument is an important argument against epistemic scientism. The crucial premise of the Fundamental Argument is that if nonscientific sources of belief did not provide us with knowledge, neither could the sciences. But, the sciences do provide us with knowledge. Thus, epistemic scientism is false. This paper defends Peels's argument against recent criticisms. In particular, Hietanen and colleagues criticize Peels's argument for resting on what they call the “garbage in, garbage out” principle (GIGO). This paper strengthens their attacks on the GIGO principle. It shows, however, that we don't need the GIGO principle to motivate the crucial premise of the Fundamental Argument. Instead, it argues that the crucial premise is true for the following reasons: scientific knowledge is the result of successful inquiry; at some point we lacked scientific knowledge; and, we cannot successfully inquire without some prior knowledge.
Reference18 articles.
1. Science and Scientism in Popular Science Writing;Ridder Jeroen;Social Epistemology Review and Reply Collective,2014
2. How
Not
to Criticise Scientism
3. Knowledge and Conditionals
4. Useful False Beliefs
5. Every Thing Must Go