Jump to ContentJump to Main Navigation
Epistemology and the Psychology of Human Judgment$
Users without a subscription are not able to see the full content.

Michael A Bishop and J. D. Trout

Print publication date: 2005

Print ISBN-13: 9780195162295

Published to Oxford Scholarship Online: July 2005

DOI: 10.1093/0195162293.001.0001

Show Summary Details
Page of

PRINTED FROM OXFORD SCHOLARSHIP ONLINE (oxford.universitypressscholarship.com). (c) Copyright Oxford University Press, 2021. All Rights Reserved. An individual user may print out a PDF of a single chapter of a monograph in OSO for personal use. date: 23 January 2022

The Troubles with Standard Analytic Epistemology

The Troubles with Standard Analytic Epistemology

(p.104) The Troubles with Standard Analytic Epistemology
Epistemology and the Psychology of Human Judgment

Michael A Bishop (Contributor Webpage)

J. D. Trout (Contributor Webpage)

Oxford University Press

This chapter compares the authors' naturalistic approach to epistemology to that of SAE. It is argued that the theories of SAE are structurally analogous to the naturalistic approach — they have at their core a descriptive theory, and from that descriptive theory, proponents of SAE draw normative, epistemological prescriptions. The prospects for the theories of SAE overcoming the is-ought gap are not good. The chapter also argues for the superiority of Strategic Reliabilism over any extant theory of Standard Analytic Epistemology.

Keywords:   naturalistic approach, descriptive theory, SAE, is-ought gap, Strategic Reliabilism

Oxford Scholarship Online requires a subscription or purchase to access the full text of books within the service. Public users can however freely search the site and view the abstracts and keywords for each book and chapter.

Please, subscribe or login to access full text content.

If you think you should have access to this title, please contact your librarian.

To troubleshoot, please check our FAQs , and if you can't find the answer there, please contact us .