Leiter Reports: A Philosophy Blog

News and views about philosophy, the academic profession, academic freedom, intellectual culture, and other topics. The world’s most popular philosophy blog, since 2003.

  1. Mark's avatar
  2. Patrick M., (Doctoral Researcher)'s avatar

    I suspect evolutionary and behavioural perspectives are left seriously underappreciated in this approach to epistemology. Reichenbach’s claim that epistemology must…

  3. S. Wallerstein's avatar
  4. AG Tanyi's avatar

    Then my question is how many of ordinary mathematicians also qualify as artists of their profession…

  5. John Rapko's avatar
  6. Mark's avatar
  7. David Reidy's avatar

Reichenbach on epistemology as a branch of sociology

Brian Leiter

A propos an earlier reference to Reichenbach, philosopher of science Brad Wray shared this interesting quote from Chapter 1 of Experience and Prediction (1938; 2006 for the University of Notre Dame edition from which the reference comes):

Every theory of knowledge must start from knowledge as a given sociological fact.  The system of knowledge as it has been built up by generations of thinkers, methods of acquiring knowledge …

all are given to us in the same way as any other sociological fact, such as social customs or religious habits or political institutions. …

Knowledge, therefore, is a very concrete thing; and the examination into its properties means studying the features of a sociological phenomenon.

We shall call the first task of epistemology its descriptive task – the task of giving a description of knowledge as it really is.  It follows, then, that epistemology in this respect forms a part of sociology” (p. 3).

As Professor Wray remarked, this is not a view one usually associates with logical positivists, although it has echoes of more radical views like those of Karl Mannheim from the 1920s.

Curious to hear from those more knowledgeable what they make of this passage.

,

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

3 responses to “Reichenbach on epistemology as a branch of sociology”

  1. S. Wallerstein

    Just want to follow this conversation. Thanks

    Reply
  2. Patrick M., (Doctoral Researcher)

    I suspect evolutionary and behavioural perspectives are left seriously underappreciated in this approach to epistemology. Reichenbach’s claim that epistemology must begin with knowledge as a sociological fact overlooks the fact that many nonhuman animals possess perceptual knowledge — for example, of a nearby cliff — that is hardly sociological in any meaningful sense. This is particularly significant given the functional similarities between human and nonhuman perceptual systems. A more appropriate starting point is almost the reverse of what Reichenbach proposes: begin with rudimentary forms of knowledge, their evolutionary origins (and what makes knowledge more powerful in selection than belief), and unsophisticated social practices, and only then extend our account to the more complex, socially mediated forms of knowledge characteristic of humans. I doubt that Reichenbach’s account could capture the breadth of knowledge we see in humans and non-human animals. It might be informative for the highly specific, highly sophisticated special case of knowledge he’s describing. However, I am hardly an expert on epistemology — I’m a behavioural scientist, so I’m happy to hear what readers think

    Reply
    1. Mark

      Do you know of anyone who’s taken the approach you describe, in philosophy or the sciences? It seems interesting.

      Reply

Designed with WordPress