Do epistemic requirements vary along with facts about what promotes agents' well-being? Epistemic instrumentalists say 'yes', and thereby earn a lot of contempt. This contempt is a mistake on two counts. First, it is incorrectly based: the reasons typically given for it are misguided. Second, it fails to distinguish between first- and second-order epistemic instrumentalism; and, it happens, only the former is contemptible.
In this book, Nathaniel P. Sharadin argues for rejecting epistemic instrumentalism as a first-order view not because it suffers extensional failures, but because it suffers explanatory ones. By contrast, he argues that epistemic instrumentalism offers a natural, straightforward explanation of why being epistemically correct matters. What emerges is a second-order instrumentalist explanation for epistemic authority that is neutral between competing first-order epistemic theories. This neutrality is an advantage. But, drawing on work from cognitive science and psychology, Sharadin argues that instrumentalists can abandon that neutrality in order to adopt a view he calls epistemic ecologism.
Epistemic Instrumentalism Explained will be of interest to researchers and advanced students working in epistemology, ethics, and philosophy of mind.
Płać wygodnie kartą, Klarną, Apple Pay lub Google Pay. Nie jesteś zadowolony? Zawsze masz 14-dniową gwarancję zwrotu pieniędzy. Więcej przeczytasz w naszych warunkach. Masz pytania? Napisz do nas na hello@memmo.org.
Memmo ułatwia naukę – gdziekolwiek jesteś na świecie. U nas znajdziesz podręczniki i sprytne narzędzia do nauki w jednym miejscu: streszczenia, quizy, podcasty i fiszki. A do tego Ted, Twój kumpel do nauki, który odpowie na wszystko, co Cię nurtuje. Ponad 50 000 studentów już tu się uczy – stworzone, byś uczył się szybciej i mniej stresował.