Virtue epistemology starts with real insights; ruins them by forced mis-application to Gettier-type pseudoproblems. http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/epistemology-virtue/ …
-
-
Replying to @Meaningness
Lesson of Gettier is that JTB is wrong & useless epistemology. Should have motivated empirical investigation of how, actually, people know.
1 reply 1 retweet 1 like -
Replying to @Meaningness
Tradition prevents philosophers actually attempting to find anything out, so just tried to find clever word-game epicyclic patches to JTB.
7 replies 2 retweets 3 likes -
Replying to @Meaningness
Meanwhile, anthropologists like Ed Hutchins http://hci.ucsd.edu/hutchins/ have found out a lot about how people know by actually observing them.
5 replies 1 retweet 6 likes -
Replying to @Meaningness
Scientists are attached to religious-dogmatic epistemological ideologies derived centuries ago from armchair philosophical speculation.
1 reply 0 retweets 4 likes -
Replying to @Meaningness
Unfortunately the ‘90s Science Wars discredited valuable empirical investigation of how science is done and how scientists know.
1 reply 0 retweets 2 likes -
Replying to @Meaningness
It was true that much of “social studies of science” was pomo blather, but scientists also hated the idea of anyone finding out what they do
1 reply 1 retweet 6 likes -
Replying to @Meaningness
Profound—but taboo—anxiety about its dogmatic epistemological theories motivates the strong resistance to empirical investigation of science
2 replies 1 retweet 5 likes -
Replying to @Meaningness
The best scientists do know that they don’t know how they know—and for most, that is vertiginous.
1 reply 3 retweets 4 likes
If you face nebulosity squarely, it need not be anxiety-provoking. We *do* know; acknowledging we don’t know how we know doesn’t negate it.
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.