Social Epistemology and Scientific objectivity

Subject Areas : Epistemological researches

جلال پیکانی ¹ (دانشگاه پیام نور)
Meysam Sadeghpour ² (PhD student in Islamic Arts,, Faculty of Artificial Arts, Islamic Art University, Tabriz, Iran)

Received: 2020-04-07 Accepted : 2020-09-05 Published : 2021-01-20

Keywords: Postmodernism, Social Epistemology, Alvin Goldman, Scientific objectivity, Thomas Kuhn,

Abstract :

Beside to postmodern approaches, on the one hand, and the positivism, on the other hand, certain aspects of social epistemology is capable to both defending some type of objectivity in the realm of science and cause to dialogue between those two camp. After introducing social epistemology in brief, in this paper, we show problematic aspects of those approaches and then show what aspects of social epistemology could serve to defend some type of objectivity in the realm of science, especially, in the philosophical atmosphere of our country, this moderate approach could be fruitful. According to social epistemology, the agent neither is absolutely free from social and political obligations, neither is absolutely dependent on such obligations. In other word, based on truth conductivity, social epistemology holds a moderate approach to objectivity of science. This may serve as a means to create a new approach to objectivity. Social Epistemology; Alvin Goldman; Scientific objectivity; Postmodernism

References:

گلدمن، آلوین .(1395). معرفت­شناسی اجتماعی، ترجمۀ مهدی رعنائی، تهران: ققنوس.

زیباکلام، سعید .(1384). معرفت­شناسی اجتماعی،تهران: سمت.

کشاورز شکری، عباس؛ غفاری هشجین، زاهد؛ عفاری، مهدی .(1391). معرفت­شناسی اجتماعی در تفکر علامه مطهری، ذهن، شماره 50، تابستان، صص 212- 185.

پایا، علی .(1377). عرض شعبده با اهل راز دروغین، کیان، شماره 43، صص 65-56.

دکارت، رنه .(1381). قواعد هدایت ذهن، ترجمۀ منوچهر صانعی، تهران: انتشارت دانشگاه شهید بهشتی.

لیدیمن، جیمز .(1390). فلسفه علم،ترجمۀ حسین کرمی، تهران: حکمت.

هافمن، دونالد .(1396). «استدلال علیه واقعیت»، در :  www.3danet.ir

Armstrong, David .(1973). Belief,Truth, and Knowledge, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Bonjour, Laurance .(2001). " Externalist Theories of Empirical Knowledge", in: Epistemology: Internalism and Externalism, Edited by Hillary kornblith, Blackwell,  pp.10-35

Conee E. and Feldman. R .(2001),.“Internalism Defended”,in:  epistemology:  Internalism and Externalism, Edited by Hillary kornblith,Blackwell, pp:231-260.

Chisholm, Roderick .(1989). Theory of Knowledge, 2st eds. Prentice-Hall, Englewood Cliffs, New Jersey.

Fuller, S.  (1988). Social Epistemology, Indiana: Indiana University Press.

Goldman, Alvin .(1999). Knowledge in a social world, Oxford University Press.

Goldman, Alvin .(2014). “Social Process Reliabilism: Solving Justification Problems in Collective Epistemology”, in Lackey 2014: 11–41.

Kitcher, Philip .(1990). “The Division of Cognitive Labor” Journal of Philosophy, 87: 5–22.

Strevens, Michael .(2003). “The Role of the Priority Rule in Science”, Journal of Philosophy, 100(2): 55–79.

List, Christian and Philip Pettit. (2011).  Group Agency: The Possibility, Design, and Status of Corporate Agents, Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Quine W.V.Q. ( 1994). “Epistemology Naturalized” In: Naturalazing Epistemology, Edited by Hillary Kornblith: pp15-32

Bird, Alexander .(2011). ”Thomas Kuhn”, available at: https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/thomas-kuhn/

Goldman, A. (2015). ”social Epistemology” , available at:

https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/epistemology-social/#SocEpiSci

Miller, A. ( 2019), “Realism”, available at: https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/realism/

Reiss, J. (2014). ”Scientific Objectivity, in: Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy” , available at: https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/scientific-objectivity/