Extended Knowledge and Social Epistemology

Email

Whatsapp

Facebook

Pinterest

Twitter

Copy link

Extended Knowledge and Social Epistemology by Dr. Varbi Roy delves into the evolution of epistemological thought, emphasizing three major Western traditions and positioning social epistemology as a recent trend. The book explores how knowledge is created, validated, and shared within social contexts, drawing from thinkers like Alvin 1. Goldman. It also examines cross-cultural perspectives, highlighting the Nyaya tradition's insights on testimonial knowledge. This work challenges the reader to reconsider the role of collective agents, social institutions, and cultural practices in shaping what we come to know and accept as truth.

Dr. Varbi Roy is the Head of the Department and Associate Professor of Philosophy at Scottish Church College, Kolkata. With over two decades of teaching experience, she is a member of the Undergraduate Board of Studies in Philosophy at the University of Calcutta. Her interests focuses on Social Epistemology, Philosophy of Peace, Feminist Philosophy, and Philosophy of Language. Dr. Roy's scholarly contributions include co-editing Conceptualising, Living, Interrogating Gender: A Student's Manual and authoring numerous research articles in esteemed journals. Her academic excellence has been recognized with prestigious awards, including the Gold Medal from the University of Calcutta for securing the First Class First position in M.A. (Philosophy), and fellowships from the United Board for Christian Higher Education in Asia (UBCHEA). Her work reflects a commitment to philosophical inquiry and innovative pedagogy.

In the present book, an attempt has been made to focus upon three major trends of western epistemological tradition and try to locate the place of social epistemology as a recent trend.

In the introduction, a brief account of the three major projects undertaken by epistemology, as a sub field of philosophy, has been provided. Social epistemological project is presented and explained as the fourth project in the field of epistemology.

In the first chapter, the traditional approach to epistemology has been discussed briefly focusing on the views of Plato, Descartes and Kant, the three major traditional epistemologists who truly represent their ages.

The second chapter traces the introduction of the analytic movement in epistemology, whereby the justified true belief analysis of knowledge comes to the fore. After elucidating the responses to ""The Gettier Problem', Quine and Rorty's views have been discussed, which provided new directions in accelerating a new trend in epistemology, namely that of social epistemology.

The third chapter is devoted to trace the history, influences and factors responsible for the emergence of social epistemology from two different perspectives - Classical and Anti-Classical. The classical view is discussed at length focusing on the model provided by Alvin 1 Goldman.

In chapter four, an attempt has been made to discuss the various classification of social epistemology stressing on the two sets of classification provided by Goldman, providing answers to the following two questions in mind - (1) Is Social Epistemology real epistemology? and (2) What is the scope of Social Epistemology?

Chapter five is concerned with discussing the pervasive use of language in transmitting knowledge from the perspective of Indian philosophy which tends to place greater emphasis on the authority of linguistic testimony and the role of language in revealing ultimate truths.

I cannot but express my deep gratitude to my teacher, Prof. Subir Ranjan Bhattacharyya, Former Professor, Department of Philosophy, University of Calcutta, for being an inspiring teacher. His guidance, wisdom, and unwavering support have played a crucial role in shaping my learning journey.

I extend my heartfelt gratitude to the Bhaktivedanta Research Centre (BRC) for their generous support in funding this project Grant No. BRC 06/2023. Their commitment to the pursuit of knowledge has been instrumental in bringing this work to fruition. Without their encouragement and financial assistance, this book would not have been possible. I am thankful to Dr. Sumanta Rudra, Dean Academics, BRC, for his continuous assistance.

I am also sincerely thankful to Dr. Madhumanjari Mandal, Principal, Scottish Church College (SCC), for her encouragement throughout this journey. I must express my gratitude to my colleagues of SCC, who have helped me with their suggestions and moral support at the times when I needed it the most. A special thanks to the four of my dear friends, Monalisa, Riddhi, Shrimoyee and Esita, who stood by me in unparalleled ways during my journey. A special note of appreciation goes to my friend, Dr. Samrat Bhattacharjee, IQAC Coordinator, SCC, whose unwavering support and belief in my work have been a constant source of inspiration.

I sincerely thank all the members of my family, Ma, Anirban, my husband and Veera, my daughter, who always provided me with emotional unfailing support, encouragement and kind cooperation throughout the work. The person, who would have been the most happy to see me successfully complete this book, is my late father, who made me who I am today. My feeling of gratitude towards him and acknowledgement of debt cannot be expressed through language.

Last, but not the least, I thank God for giving me the strength and opportunities to finish my work successfully.

Epistemology as a sub discipline of Philosophy, ever since its inception, has been concerned with three major issues: First what is knowledge? Or how do we define knowledge? Second what are the means of acquiring it? Or how do we get knowledge? And third, is knowledge possible?

Accordingly, epistemology has traditionally undertaken three projects. The first is the analysis of knowledge. This project has flourished in the twentieth century, especially after the publication of Gettier's paper, which exposed difficulties with the traditional analysis of knowledge as justified true belief. The second project is battling skepticism. This project has occupied a central place in mainstream epistemology. The third project is developing criteria for evaluating beliefs that can guide people in acquiring true beliefs and avoiding false beliefs. While this project troubled enlightenment philosophers, such as Locke, Descartes and Hume, contemporary epistemology has somewhat stepped away from it, focusing more on the first two projects. Posterior to the Gettier problem, other related issues in epistemology along with the standard analysis of knowledge, began to receive attention; in a way Gettier event has caused a wholesome renewal and revision of anything and everything concerned with epistemology. Among the cluster of issues that received attention in the post Gettier period, the prime theme was the justification condition. In the post Quinean era, there arose a general consensus that epistemology should be a multidisciplinary affair. Though philosophy as the chief conductor of epistemology may retain its status, many other disciplines including empirical disciplines have become important parts of the ensemble. With the dawn of the technological era, individual epistemology gave way to social epistemology that tries to address issues regarding knowledge dissemination, seeking help from various social sciences and humanities that may provide models and insights of the social systems of science, learning and culture. Thus, since the last few decades a relatively new project has been taken up by social epistemologists, which is mainly concerned with studying the social aspects of knowledge. While contemporary epistemologists have been heavily engaged with the analysis of knowledge and justification, they have been much less engaged with the project of the epistemic evaluation of our beliefs. Because we acquire most of our beliefs from the testimony of others and from social institutions such as science that are responsible for the production of knowledge, Social epistemology the branch of epistemology that engages with the fourth project of studying the social dimensions of knowledge - provides us with fruitful resources for developing criteria to evaluate our beliefs.

Traditionally, an epistemologist is not concerned with the fact, how we know some particular truth, but whether we are justified in knowing or whether knowledge is possible or not. Philosophers, though, have differed among themselves about 'certain knowledge' and how it is connected with what we ordinarily know.

Rationalists believe that the truths that constitute certain knowledge are related to other truths just as the axioms are related to the theorems. Empiricists, on the other hand, hold that truths relating to empirical knowledge can be constructed out of primary truths as a building is constructed from its foundation. These discussions are not independent of the conceptual question about the nature of knowledge.

Most philosophers had something to say about the nature of knowledge, many taking its nature for granted. From this many traditional epistemological difficulties have cropped up. Plato begins with the assumption that there is knowledge and a philosopher's task is to study its nature, source and its limits. He starts with the paradigm cases of indisputable knowledge. Plato's dialogues, written in three different periods which can be characterized as the earlier period, the transition period and the period of maturity, deals with the problem of distinguishing knowledge from true belief.

The Medieval Thinkers held the view that knowledge of a thing involves knowledge of the general characteristics it possesses and therefore it is subsumed under a universal. But medieval thinkers differed among themselves in accepting this fact. They argued about the exact status of universals. The main schools of thought on the subject were the Realists, the Conceptualists and the Nominalists. Realists considered that universals have objective existence. Conceptualists said universals exist only as concepts in the mind and Nominalists held that words are the only universal things. The emergence of science during Renaissance gave rise to questions about claims to knowledge and to the search for a method, which would determine truth.

"