Talk:Evolutionary epistemology: Difference between revisions
Barandiaran (talk | contribs) |
Barandiaran (talk | contribs) |
||
| Line 32: | Line 32: | ||
= What has Brian Skyrms done? = |
= What has Brian Skyrms done? = |
||
I have deleted the following sentence from the text: "[[Brian Skyrms]] is a notable academic in the field." It is good to mention an author but support should be given for its inclusion, even more when figures such as Donald Campbell, Kornad Lorenz, or Carl Popper (founders of this field) are not even mentioned. |
I have deleted the following sentence from the text: "[[Brian Skyrms]] is a notable academic in the field." It is good to mention an author but support should be given for its inclusion, even more when figures such as Donald Campbell, Kornad Lorenz, or Carl Popper (founders of this field) are not even mentioned.--[[User:Barandiaran|Barandiaran]] ([[User talk:Barandiaran|talk]]) 17:26, 19 June 2008 (UTC) |
||
Revision as of 17:26, 19 June 2008
 | Philosophy: Epistemology Unassessed | |||||||||||||||||||||
| ||||||||||||||||||||||
Not bad to begin with but I think some editing needs to be done, take the first paragraph:
Evolutionary epistemology is a theory, in metaphysics, applying the concepts of biological evolution to the growth of human knowledge and, in particular, scientific theories. It argues that human knowledge advances by trial and error, in which various competing conjectures are put to the test (ultimately by the real world, but also by empirical testing). As such, it bears remarkable similarities to the process of evolution by natural selection.
1. Get rid of the phrase "is a theory, in metaphysics" It is not a metaphysical theory. 2. Revise the phrase "are put to the test (ultimately by the real world, but also by empirical testing)" with something like "are subject to criticism"
questions for possible expansion
- What resources can people look for that approach ideas in an evolutionary epistemological approach?
- How does this approach contrast to other historical methods?
- What is the research process particular to an ev-ep approach?
- In what format does an ev-ep treatment of a topic led itself to?
--albamuth 09:08, 12 October 2005 (UTC)
This is fairly confusing... the first paragraph is about invoking biological evolution as an explanation for human behavior, whereas the second is about invoking processes analolgous to biological evolution to describe the progress of science. These are two completely different things... are both concepts referred to in different circles as "evolutionary epistemology," or was the author of one of the paragraphs confused...? 68.35.68.100 05:27, 14 October 2006 (UTC)
A confusion of two distinct ideas?
It is probably proper to isolate two distinct ideas that are both sometimes referred to as 'evolutionary epistemology' - but I don't have time to edit the page myself atm.
- A subfield of naturalized epistemology: it uses evolutionary ideas to explain how and why we know stuff - broadly speaking.
- A theory in epistemology / philosophy of science that shows how our ideas evolve over time, sometimes eerily comparable to biological evolution (an analogy, cf. Toulmin and others) or even by an algorithm that is identical to how natural selection works (cf. memetics).
Stdbrouw 20:42, 27 December 2006 (UTC)
What has Brian Skyrms done?
I have deleted the following sentence from the text: "Brian Skyrms is a notable academic in the field." It is good to mention an author but support should be given for its inclusion, even more when figures such as Donald Campbell, Kornad Lorenz, or Carl Popper (founders of this field) are not even mentioned.--Barandiaran (talk) 17:26, 19 June 2008 (UTC)