Epistemology is the branch of philosophy concerned with the theory of knowledge.
Two questions epistemologists tackle are:
Without a doubt our knowledge is limited. Perhaps we know nothing at all. What if our subjective sensory experiences don't map onto the real world at all, as is the case when dreaming? Or, what if we are living in a vat plugged into machines that stimulate our neurons, tricking us into thinking we are actually having experiences (as in the Matrix)? Then we might believe we know things about the external world - but we'd be wrong. So, how can we be sure about anything without a 'philosophical sky hook' to pull us up to an objective vantage point?
There are three main branches of epistemology segregated according to how knowledge is derived (i.e. how questions (1) and (2) are answered): empiricism, particularism, and skepticism.
The empiricist is scientific, methodical and systematic about knowledge acquisition. S/he accepts (2), that we've established the reliability of the criteria we use, and now strive to answer (1) as many times as possible.
The particularist assumes we all begin with some set of foundational knowledge, e.g. any self-presenting sensory state. S/he accepts (1), that, after all, we know many things that we cannot possibly we wrong about, e.g. it looks to me like the lights are on now (they might not be. I could be dreaming, hallucinating, etc., but how could I be wrong about it seeming to me that they are?). In having (1) to build on, the particularist may now work out (2), to discover which criteria will yield true beliefs.
Skeptics believe that you cannot have an answer to (1) without first having an answer to (2), and vice versa. But the skeptic doesn't, necessarily refuse to believe anything at all, in fact, s/he may have the full compliment of beliefs that anyone else has - plus one more - the belief that any or all the things s/he believes may be false. Skepticism, simply put, is the ability to suspend judgment.
|