Analytic theology has, since its inception, been a metaphysics-heavy enterprise. Indeed, a brief perusal of the contents of The Oxford Handbook of Philosophical Theology (i.e. a predecessor to the present volume under review) reveals as much. My noting this emphasis on metaphysics is not a criticism, for the fruits of Christian analytic metaphysics have been widespread indeed. Nevertheless, developments in epistemology have been at least as significant in many respects as those in metaphysics, and thus, the comparative rarity with which they emerge in discussion in contemporary theology is unfortunate. Such a lament, however, has in recent times become less apt, for with the release of The Oxford Handbook of the Epistemology of Theology, we now have a text which ably introduces its audience of theologians, scriptural scholars, and philosophers to a broad class of epistemological concerns for theology. No one writing in analytic theology should remain wholly ignorant of its contents, which hail from many of the best epistemological and theological minds today.
Download Free PDF View PDF
Journal of Analytic Theology
Download Free PDF View PDF
Philosophy in Review
Download Free PDF View PDF
The Incarnate Word
These thirteen paragraphs portray epistemology as the study, not directly of knowing as a human action (which could be considered the object also of anthropology) but as the study of the mode of being of the object in the subject and, in this sense, of intentional being. Moreover, intentional being is not understood as the being of the cognitional species or representation, which is real and subjective, but as the being of the known, as the presence of the known to the knower (obviously, through the species but a being not reduced to the subjective being of the species): this kind of being is the proper object of epistemology. Other considerations regarding the distinction between metaphysics and epistemology take place as well. As regards the method, this essay attempts to apply Aquinas’ four steps of scientific reasoning to epistemology, in the following fashion and order: 1- Solution of the problem of the universals by recourse to the theory of the agent intellect (resolutio secundum rem); 2- Definition of knowledge as intentional possession of being (res. sec. rationem); 3- Judgment of value regarding the different instances of human knowledge or critique of knowledge (compositio secundum rem) and 4- Reinterpretation (in the light of the previous path) of common notions of epistemology, such as truth, certainty, evidence, and error (comp. sec. rationem).
Download Free PDF View PDF
A Priori Justification. By Albert Casullo.Epistemic Justification: Internalism vs Externalism, Foundations vs Virtues. By Laurence BonJour and Ernest Sosa.New Essays on Semantic Externalism and Self-Knowledge. Edited by Susana Nuccetelli.Pathways to Knowledge: Private and Public. By Alvin I. Goldman.The Sceptics: Contemporary Essays. Edited by Steven Luper.Thinking about Knowing. By Jay F. Rosenberg.
Download Free PDF View PDF
Logos & Episteme: An International Journal of Epistemology
Download Free PDF View PDF
A common presupposition in epistemology is that the processes contributing to the generation of knowledge do not extend beyond the knower's skin. This paper challenges this presupposition. I adduce a novel kind case that causes trouble for a number of even the most promising accounts of knowledge in current literature (virtue epistemological and modal accounts), at least so long as the presupposition is in place. I then look at a couple of recent accounts of knowledge that drop the presupposition and expressly allow the relevant processes to extended beyond the knower's skin. While these accounts can handle the problem case, they encounter difficulties elsewhere: extension occurs too easily and so the accounts predict knowledge where they ought not. Finally, I offer a novel way of extending epistemology and argue that it can steer clear of the problems on both sides.
Download Free PDF View PDF
Kriterion - Journal of Philosophy
Pritchard calls his epistemological disjunctivism ‘the holy grail of epistemology’. What this metaphor means is that the acceptance of this thesis puts the internalism-externalism debate to an end, thanks to satisfaction of intuitions standing behind both competing views. Simultaneously, Pritchard strongly emphasizes that the endorsement of epistemological disjunctivism does not commit one to metaphysical disjunctivism. In this paper I analyze the formulations and motivations of epistemological disjunctivism presented by Pritchard and McDowell. Then I consider the most common argument for the claim that epistemological disjunctivism can be held without the support of metaphysical disjunctivism. I conclude that the plausibility of epistemological disjunctivism depends on the plausibility of metaphysical disjunctivism. If the latter is false, the former postulates a set of conditions for epistemic justification that are impossible to be fulfilled.
Download Free PDF View PDF
A comparison of epistemology of religion and that of Science seems to be crucial to the human being of today who develops in a surrounding defined to a great extend by Science, and yet seeks a meaning of life that Science is not able to deliver. In particular, we describe several similarities and major differentiations between the scientific epistemology and the Christian-theological-eucharistic epistemology. We infer that there are several common features in both ways of knowledge and some major differences. Our analysis suggests that a synergy of the two methodologies is normal in modern times and that the theological epistemology can complements scientific research process to its humanization.
Download Free PDF View PDF
The British Journal For the Philosophy of Science
