Responsibilism and the Analytic-Sociological Debate in Social Epistemology

This is the second paper in the invited collection. Dieleman provides an overview of the “state-of-the-field” debate between Analytic Social Epistemology (ASE), represented by Alvin Goldman, and what Dieleman calls the Sociological Social Epistemology (SSE), represented by Steve Fuller. In response...

Full description

Bibliographic Details
Main Author: Susan Dieleman
Format: Article
Language:English
Published: University of Western Ontario 2016-10-01
Series:Feminist Philosophy Quarterly
Online Access:https://ojs.lib.uwo.ca/index.php/fpq/article/view/3044
id doaj-ff7a5638c566469a936e98ace882eaab
record_format Article
spelling doaj-ff7a5638c566469a936e98ace882eaab2021-09-10T21:59:36ZengUniversity of Western OntarioFeminist Philosophy Quarterly2371-25702016-10-012210.5206/fpq/2016.2.6Responsibilism and the Analytic-Sociological Debate in Social EpistemologySusan Dieleman0University of Saskatchewan This is the second paper in the invited collection. Dieleman provides an overview of the “state-of-the-field” debate between Analytic Social Epistemology (ASE), represented by Alvin Goldman, and what Dieleman calls the Sociological Social Epistemology (SSE), represented by Steve Fuller. In response to this ongoing debate, this paper has two related and complementary objectives. The first is to show that the debate between analytic and sociological versions of social epistemology is overly simplistic and doesn’t take into account additional positions that are available and, indeed, have been available since social epistemology was (re)introduced in the mid to late 1980s. The second is to uncover and tell a story of how Lorraine Code’s Epistemic Responsibility is one such additional position. Looking to Code's Epistemic Responsibility reveals the artificiality of the debate between analytic and sociological social epistemologists. https://ojs.lib.uwo.ca/index.php/fpq/article/view/3044
collection DOAJ
language English
format Article
sources DOAJ
author Susan Dieleman
spellingShingle Susan Dieleman
Responsibilism and the Analytic-Sociological Debate in Social Epistemology
Feminist Philosophy Quarterly
author_facet Susan Dieleman
author_sort Susan Dieleman
title Responsibilism and the Analytic-Sociological Debate in Social Epistemology
title_short Responsibilism and the Analytic-Sociological Debate in Social Epistemology
title_full Responsibilism and the Analytic-Sociological Debate in Social Epistemology
title_fullStr Responsibilism and the Analytic-Sociological Debate in Social Epistemology
title_full_unstemmed Responsibilism and the Analytic-Sociological Debate in Social Epistemology
title_sort responsibilism and the analytic-sociological debate in social epistemology
publisher University of Western Ontario
series Feminist Philosophy Quarterly
issn 2371-2570
publishDate 2016-10-01
description This is the second paper in the invited collection. Dieleman provides an overview of the “state-of-the-field” debate between Analytic Social Epistemology (ASE), represented by Alvin Goldman, and what Dieleman calls the Sociological Social Epistemology (SSE), represented by Steve Fuller. In response to this ongoing debate, this paper has two related and complementary objectives. The first is to show that the debate between analytic and sociological versions of social epistemology is overly simplistic and doesn’t take into account additional positions that are available and, indeed, have been available since social epistemology was (re)introduced in the mid to late 1980s. The second is to uncover and tell a story of how Lorraine Code’s Epistemic Responsibility is one such additional position. Looking to Code's Epistemic Responsibility reveals the artificiality of the debate between analytic and sociological social epistemologists.
url https://ojs.lib.uwo.ca/index.php/fpq/article/view/3044
work_keys_str_mv AT susandieleman responsibilismandtheanalyticsociologicaldebateinsocialepistemology
_version_ 1717757544649195520