Epistemology Class

[Afterthought]

This semester, my (secular) class will look at the epistemology of Charles Peirce, among others too. Are there any recommendations for what to look out for, or pay attention to especially? I ask because I've had difficulty finding much on him. (I did glance through some of his writings we will read)

 

[jwright82]

What are the others you are going to be looking at?

 

[Afterthought]

Descartes, Hume, and something from Plato's dialogues (the book has Euthyphro, Meno, Phaedo, Crito, and Apology).

 

[Claudiu]

Descartes, Hume, and something from Plato's dialogues (the book has Euthyphro, Meno, Phaedo, Crito, and Apology).

I'm not too familiar with Peirce myself, but I am familiar with these philosophers.

If you are somewhat familiar with presuppositional apologetics it will be easier to understand where these philosophers fall short. Much can be said about these philosophers view, but I think it would be easier to answer your questions as you read (i.e. something specific in their philosophy).

For now, in terms of epistemology, Plato had a privileged position for reason. His metaphysics and epistemology are rather intertwined so that they almost go hand in hand. Reason was knowledge of the Forms (remember the two realms distinction in Plato). Descartes too regarded reason as very important. In his Meditations he began to doubt everything, except the fact that he was doubting. Therefore, he concluded that he was essentially a "thinking thing". His philosophy, too, overemphasizes reason and begins with the "I". That is, he looks inward to resolve his doubt. As Christians, we would object to this solely inner introspection. Then, Hume was himself a skeptic, and claimed that reason itself was overemphasized by previous philosophers. He points out that we don't have reason to believe things like cause and effect, etc. Hume, I have found, has been a useful tool in showing how irrational and hopeless the secular, humanist worldview is. His epistemology, in my opinion, is a natural outflow of a Godless worldview. In that sense he was just being consistent.

 

[gmalloy]

The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy is usually a good place to start. Here is the link for Peirce.

Charles Sanders Peirce (Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy)

 

[Claudiu]

The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy is usually a good place to start. Here is the link for Peirce.

Charles Sanders Peirce (Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy)

I'd stay away from wiki. SEP is the way to go if you want reliable information.

 

[CharlieJ]

Wow, so he's the guy who really pushed abductive arguments. Love it.

BTW, I've really enjoyed Esther Meeks's Loving to Know: Covenant Epistemology. She does a great take on Michael Polanyi, one of my favorite philosophers.

 

[Afterthought]

Thanks guys! Yeah, this Peirce fellow is quite something. I am actually familiar with Descartes and Hume to some extent, from earlier classes. Plato I'm not nearly as familiar with, though there's also lots written on him. I remember checking the Stanford Encyclopedia but finding it not too helpful because it doesn't really criticize Peirce's philosophy in a significant manner, though I could be remembering wrong and may need to check again. Most of what I've found on Peirce either gives some minor criticism that isn't important in the long wrong, or spends time trying to explain his views, some of which (e.g., his metaphysics, "teleology," views on inquiry, and pragmatic maxim) I am familiar with. I haven't found any Christian review of his thoughts either.

Perhaps it would be better to post topics as they come up, though if there was something general to say about his epistemology that isn't or is consistent with a Christian view of things, or some point to pay attention to in the building of his views, this thread may be useful for that (like what Claudiu did in his reply for Descartes, Hume, and Plato).