Skip to main content

Quine on the Norms of Naturalized Epistemology

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
  • 302 Accesses

Part of the book series: History of Analytic Philosophy ((History of Analytic Philosophy))

Abstract

My central goal in this paper is to interpret what Quine says in his Kant lectures about the norms of epistemology and the doctrinal and conceptual tasks of epistemology—the tasks, respectively, of constructing good theories and of clarifying meanings—in light of what he says about these topics in several of his earlier and later works. I argue that despite one puzzling passage in the Kant lectures that misleadingly suggests otherwise, the norms of Quine’s epistemology are exclusively doctrinal, not conceptual.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution.

Buying options

Chapter
USD   29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD   69.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Hardcover Book
USD   89.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Learn about institutional subscriptions

Notes

  1. 1.

    This is implied by the way Quine introduces the distinction in the Kant lectures. As we saw in a passage quoted earlier, he writes, “The traditional concerns of epistemology are of two sorts, that I call conceptual and doctrinal” (Quine, This volume, 31). I understand Quine’s use of the phrase “that I call,” not “which I shall call,” for instance, to signal to his audience that he intends to use “conceptual” and “doctrinal” in the way he explains them in previous work. The only earlier publication in which he defines the terms in “Epistemology Naturalized.” Moreover, apart from the Kant lectures, as far as I know, he does not use the terms again.

  2. 2.

    This key point is also emphasized in Verhaegh (2014, 168–171), Johnsen (2017, chapter 10, 168–173), and in a less direct way, but with a similar appreciation of the central importance for Quine of the Humean predicament, in Gregory (2008).

  3. 3.

    I discuss this point and it consequences in more detail in Ebbs (2011).

  4. 4.

    Johnsen (2005) sparked some of the thinking that led me to the reading I present here. Gregory (2008, chapter 5), arrives at a similar conclusion, without highlighting, as I do, that Quine’s epistemological norms are part of what he calls the doctrinal side of epistemology, whose task is constructing good theories. Peter Hylton distinguishes between epistemological norms that tell us “how to act so as to obtain successful theories” and epistemological norms for “the thinking-up of successful theories” (Hylton 2007, 84). On my reading, the norms of Quine’s epistemology that concern how to act to obtain successful theories are not distinct from the norms for thinking up successful theories.

References

  • Carnap, Rudolf. 1934. The Task of the Logic of Science. An English translation of a paper originally published in German in 1934. In Unified Science: The Vienna Circle Monographs Series Originally Edited by Otto Neurath, 1987, ed. Brian McGuinness, 46–66. Dordrecht: D. Reidel.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • ———. 1936–1937. Testability and Meaning. (Parts I and II). Philosophy of Science III: 419–471; IV: 1–40.

    Google Scholar 

  • ———. 1937. The Logical Syntax of Language. An expanded version of what was originally published in German in 1934. Trans. A. Smeaton. London: Kegan Paul, Trench, Trubner & Co.

    Google Scholar 

  • ———. 1939. Foundations of Logic and Mathematics. Encyclopedia of Unified Science 1 (3). Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • ———. 1956. Meaning and Necessity. 2nd ed. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ebbs, Gary. 2011. Quine Gets the Last Word. The Journal of Philosophy 108 (11): 627–632.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fogelin, Robert J., 2004. Aspects of Quine’s Naturalized Epistemology. In Gibson 2004a, 1946.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gibson, Roger, Jr. 2004a. The Cambridge Companion to Quine. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • ———. 2004b. Willard Van Orman Quine. In Gibson 2004a, 1–18.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gregory, Paul A. 2008. Quine’s Naturalism: Language, Theory, and the Knowing Subject. London: Continuum International Publishing Group.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hylton, Peter. 2007. Quine. New York: Routledge.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Johnsen, Bredo. 2005. How to Read ‘Epistemology Naturalized. The Journal of Philosophy 102 (2): 78–93.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • ———. 2017. Righting Epistemology: Hume’s Revolution. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Kim, Jaegwon. 1988. What Is ‘Naturalized Epistemology? Philosophical Perspectives 2: 381–405.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kleene, S.C. 1952. Introduction to Meta-Mathematics. Amsterdam: North-Holland Publishing Co.

    Google Scholar 

  • Quine, W.V. 1946/2008. Lectures on David Hume’s Philosophy. In Confessions of a Confirmed Extensionalist and Other Essays, ed. Dagfinn Føllesdal and Douglas B. Quine, 36–136. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • ———. 1953. Two Dogmas of Empiricism. In From a Logical Point of View, 20–46. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • ———. 1960. Word and Object. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • ———. 1963. Carnap and Logical Truth. In The Philosophy of Rudolf Carnap, ed. Paul A. Schilpp, 385–406. La Salle, IL: Open Court.

    Google Scholar 

  • ———. 1969. Epistemology Naturalized. In Ontological Relativity and Other Essays, 69–80. New York: Columbia University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • ———. 1986. Reply to Morton White. In The Philosophy of W. V. Quine, ed. Lewis E. Hahn and Paul A. Schilpp, 663–665. La Salle, IL: Open Court.

    Google Scholar 

  • ———. 1990. Comment on Lauener. In Perspectives on Quine, ed. Robert Barrett and Roger Gibson, 53–54. Oxford: Blackwell.

    Google Scholar 

  • ———. 1992. Pursuit of Truth. Revised ed. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • ———. 1995. From Stimulus to Science. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • ———. 2019. Science and Sensibilia: The 1980 Immanuel Kant Lectures, ed. Robert Sinclair. Cham: Palgrave Macmillan.

    Google Scholar 

  • Verhaegh, Sander. 2014. Quine’s Argument from Despair. British Journal for the History of Philosophy 22 (1): 150–173.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

I presented an early draft of this paper in February 2018 at Quine’s 1980 Kant Lectures, a Group session of the Society for the Study of the History of Analytical Philosophy at the Central Division meetings of the APA in Chicago. I thank the chair of the session, Joshua Eisenthal, and the other participants for their comments immediately following my presentation, Adam Leite for helping me to sort through some of the epistemological assumptions that Quine rejects, and Robert Sinclair and Sander Verhaegh for their very helpful written comments and editorial advice on the penultimate draft.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Gary Ebbs .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2019 The Author(s)

About this chapter

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this chapter

Ebbs, G. (2019). Quine on the Norms of Naturalized Epistemology. In: Sinclair, R. (eds) Science and Sensibilia by W. V. Quine. History of Analytic Philosophy. Palgrave Macmillan, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-04909-6_7

Download citation

Publish with us

Policies and ethics