Advertisement

Synthese

pp 1–21 | Cite as

Epistemic autonomy and group knowledge

  • Chris DragosEmail author
Article
  • 10 Downloads

Abstract

I connect two increasingly popular ideas in social epistemology—group knowledge and epistemic extension—both departures from mainstream epistemological tradition. In doing so, I generate a framework for conceptualizing and organizing contemporary epistemology along several core axes. This, in turn, allows me to delineate a largely unexplored frontier in group epistemology. The bulk of extant work in group epistemology can be dubbed intra-group epistemology: the study of epistemically salient happenings within groups. I delineate and attempt to motivate what I dub inter-group epistemology: the study of epistemically salient happenings between groups and other subjects and entities.

Keywords

Group knowledge Epistemic autonomy Collective epistemology Social epistemology Epistemology of groups Epistemic dependence 

Notes

Acknowledgements

I thank Sandy Goldberg, Brad Wray, Boaz Miller, Jeroen de Ridder, Haixin Dang, Georgi Gardiner, Mike Ashfield, and two anonymous referees at Synthese for helpful comments on various ancestors of this paper. I also thank organizers and participants at the 2016 University of Tartu Graduate Conference in Social Epistemology, the 2016 University of Pittsburgh and Carnegie Melon Graduate Philosophy Conference, the Social Epistemology colloquium of the 2017 Eastern Division meeting of the American Philosophical Association, the Social Epistemology colloquium of the 2017 meeting of the Canadian Philosophical Association, the 2017 Social Epistemology Research Group (SERG) and Network on Epistemology and Society (EpiSoc) Summer School in Social Epistemology, and two work-in-progress talks at the University of Toronto’s Institute for the History and Philosophy of Science and Technology.

References

  1. Aad, G., Abajyan, T., Abbott, B. K., Abdallah, J. M., Abdel Khalek, S., Abdelalim, A. A., et al. (2012). Observation of a new particle in the search for the Standard Model Higgs boson with the ATLAS detector at the LHC. Physics Letters B,716(1), 1–29.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Aad, G., Abbot, B. K., Abdallah, J. M., Abdinov, O. B., Aben, R., Abolins, M., et al. (2015). Combined measurement of the Higgs Boson Mass in pp collisions at √s = 7 and 8 TeV with the ATLAS and CMS experiments. Physical Review Letters,114(19), 1–45.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Alston, W. (1995). How to think about reliability. Philosophical Topics,23(1), 1–29.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Andersen, H. (2010). Joint acceptance and scientific change. Episteme,7(3), 248–265.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Andersen, H., & Wagenknecht, S. (2013). Epistemic dependence in interdisciplinary groups. Synthese,190(11), 1881–1898.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Baumann, C. (2011). Gilbert’s account of norm-guided behaviour: A critique. In H. B. Schmid, D. Dirtes, & M. Weber (Eds.), Collective epistemology (pp. 227–241). Frankfurt, Germany: Ontos Verlag.Google Scholar
  7. Beatty, J., & Moore, A. (2010). Should we aim for consensus? Episteme,7(3), 198–214.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Bird, A. (2010). Social knowing: The social sense of ‘scientific knowledge’. Philosophical Perspectives,24(1), 23–56.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Bird, A. (2014). When is there a group that knows? In J. Lackey (Ed.), Essays in collective epistemology (pp. 42–61). Oxford: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Bouvier, A. (2004). Individual beliefs and collective beliefs in science and philosophy: The plural subject and the polyphonic subject accounts. Philosophy of the Social Sciences,34(3), 382–407.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Bouvier, A. (2010). Passive consensus and active commitment in the sciences. Episteme,7(3), 185–197.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Brenner, P. S., & DeLamater, J. (2016). Lies, damned lies, and survey self-reports? Identity as a cause of measurement bias. Social Psychology Quarterly,79(4), 333–354.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Briggs, R. (2012). The normative standing of group agents. Episteme,9(3), 283–291.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Briggs, R., Cariani, F., Easwaran, K., & Fitelson, B. (2014). Individual coherence and group coherence. In J. Lackey (Ed.), Essays in collective epistemology (pp. 215–238). Oxford: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Brogaard, B. (2014). A partial defense of knowledge via epistemic extension. Philosophical Issues,24(1), 39–62.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Cariani, F. (2012). Epistemology in Group Agency: Six objections in search of the truth. Episteme,9(3), 255–269.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Carter, J. Adam. (2015). Group knowledge and epistemic defeat. Ergo,2(28), 711–735.Google Scholar
  18. Carter, J. Adam, Kallestrup, J., Palermos, O., & Pritchard, D. (2014). Varieties of externalism. Philosophical Issues,24(1), 63–109.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Chatrchyan, S., Khachatryan, V., Sirunyan, A. M., Tumasyan, A., Adam, W., Aguilo, E., et al. (2012). Observation of a new boson at a mass of 125 GeV with the CMS experiment at the LHC. Physics Letters B,716(1), 30–61.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Cheon, H. (2014). In what sense is scientific knowledge collective knowledge? Philosophy of the Social Sciences,44(4), 407–423.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Clarke, A. (2015). What ‘extended me’ knows. Synthese,192(11), 3757–3775.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Clark, A., & Chalmers, D. (1998). The extended mind. Analysis,58(1), 7–19.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. de Ridder, J. (2014). Epistemic dependence and collective scientific knowledge. Synthese,191(1), 37–53.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Dewitt, A. (2012). Group agency and epistemic dependency. Episteme,9(3), 235–244.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Dragos, C. (2016a). Which groups have scientific knowledge? Wray vs. Rolin. Social Epistemology,30(5–6), 611–623.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Dragos, C. (2016b). Justified group belief in science. Social Epistemology Review and Reply Collective,5(9), 6–12.Google Scholar
  27. Dragos, C. (2019). Groups can know how. American Philosophical Quarterly,56(3), 265–276.Google Scholar
  28. Fagan, M. (2011). Is there collective scientific knowledge? Arguments from explanation. Philosophical Quarterly,61(243), 247–269.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Fagan, M. (2012). Collective scientific knowledge. Philosophy Compass,7(12), 821–831.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Fallis, D. (2007). Collective epistemic goals. Social Epistemology,21(3), 267–280.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Frans, J., & Kosolosky, L. (2014). Mathematical proofs in practice: Revisiting the reliability of published mathematical proofs. Theoria,29(3), 345–360.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Geist, C., Löwe, B., & Van Kerkhove, B. (2010). Peer review and knowledge by testimony in mathematics. In B. Löwe & T. Müller (Eds.), Philosophy of mathematics: Sociological aspects and mathematical practice (pp. 155–178). London: College Publications.Google Scholar
  33. Giere, R. (2002). Discussion note: Distributed cognition in epistemic cultures. Philosophy of Science,69(4), 637–644.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Giere, R. (2006). Scientific perspectivism. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Giere, R. (2007). Distributed cognition without distributed knowing. Social Epistemology,21(3), 313–320.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Giere, R. (2011). Distributed cognition as human centered although not human bound: Reply to Vaesen. Social Epistemology,25(4), 393–399.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Giere, R. (2012). Scientific cognition: Human centered but not human bound. Philosophical Explorations,15(2), 199–206.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Gilbert, M. (1989). On social facts. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
  39. Gilbert, M. (1994). Remarks on collective belief. In F. F. Schmitt (Ed.), Socializing epistemology: The social dimensions of knowledge (pp. 235–256). Lanham, MD: Rowman and Littlefield.Google Scholar
  40. Gilbert, M. (2000). Collective belief and scientific change. In Sociality and responsibility: New essays in plural subject theory (pp. 37–49). Lanham, MD: Rowman and Littlefield.Google Scholar
  41. Gilbert, M. (2004). Collective epistemology. Episteme,1(2), 95–107.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Gilbert, M., & Pilchman, D. (2014). Belief, acceptance, and what happens in groups: Some methodological considerations. In J. Lackey (Ed.), Essays in collective epistemology (pp. 189–212). Oxford: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Goldberg, S. (2010). Relying on others: An essay in epistemology. Oxford: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Goldberg, S. (2011). Division of epistemic labor. Episteme,8(1), 112–125.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Goldberg, S. (2012). Epistemic extension, testimony, and the epistemology of instrument-based belief. Philosophical Explorations,15(2), 181–197.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Goldman, A. (1979). What is justified belief? In G. S. Pappas (Ed.), Justification and knowledge (pp. 1–23). Dordrecht: Dordrecht Reidel.Google Scholar
  47. Goldman, A. (2004). Group knowledge versus group rationality: Two approaches to social epistemology. Episteme,1(1), 11–22.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. Goldman, A. (2014). Social process reliabilism. In J. Lackey (Ed.), Essays in collective epistemology (pp. 11–39). Oxford: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. Grcar, J. F. (2010). Errors and corrections in mathematics literature. Notices of the American Mathematical Society,60(4), 418–425.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. Green, A. (2012). Extending the credit theory of knowledge. Philosophical Explorations,15(2), 121–132.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. Green, A. (2013). Deficient testimony is deficient teamwork. Episteme,11(2), 213–227.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. Green, A. (2014). Evaluating distributed cognition. Synthese,191(1), 79–95.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. Hakli, R. (2007). On the possibility of group knowledge without belief. Social Epistemology,21(3), 249–266.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  54. Hakli, R. (2011). On dialectical justification of group beliefs. In H. B. Schmid, D. Dirtes, & M. Weber (Eds.), Collective epistemology (pp. 119–153). Frankfurt: Ontos Verlag.Google Scholar
  55. Hardwig, J. (1985). Epistemic dependence. The Journal of Philosophy,82(7), 335–349.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  56. Hutchins, E. L. (1995). Cognition in the wild. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
  57. Kelp, C. (2013). Extended cognition and robust virtue epistemology. Erkenntnis,78(2), 245–252.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  58. Kelp, C. (2014). Extended cognition and robust virtue epistemology: Response to Vaesen. Erkenntnis,79(3), 729–732.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  59. Klausen, S. H. (2015). Group knowledge: A real world approach. Synthese,192(3), 813–839.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  60. Knorr-Cetina, K. (1999). Epistemic cultures: How the sciences make knowledge. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
  61. Kusch, M. (2002). Knowledge by agreement. Oxford: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  62. Kusch, M. (2014). The metaphysics and politics of corporate personhood. Erkenntnis,79(9), 1587–1600.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  63. Lackey, J. (2007). Why we don’t deserve credit for everything we know. Synthese,158(3), 345–361.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  64. Lackey, J. (2009). Knowledge and credit. Philosophical Studies,142(1), 27–42.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  65. Lackey, J. (2014). Socially knowledge. Philosophical Issues,24(1), 282–298.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  66. Lackey, J. (2016). What is justified group belief? Philosophical Review,125(3), 341–396.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  67. List, C. (2005). Group knowledge and group rationality: A judgement aggregation perspective. Episteme,2(1), 25–38.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  68. List, C. (2016). What is it like to be a group agent? Nous.  https://doi.org/10.1111/nous.12162.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  69. List, C., & Pettit, P. (2006). Group agency and supervenience. Southern Journal of Philosophy,44(S1), 85–105.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  70. List, C., & Pettit, P. (2011). Group agency: The possibility, design, and status of corporate agents. Oxford: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  71. List, C., & Pettit, P. (2012). Episteme symposium on group agency: Replies to Gaus, Cariani, Sylvan, and Briggs. Episteme,9(3), 293–309.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  72. Martinson, B. C., Anderson, M. S., & de Vries, R. (2005). Scientists behaving badly. Nature,435(7043), 737–738.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  73. Mathiesen, K. (2006). The epistemic features of group belief. Episteme,2(3), 161–175.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  74. Mathiesen, K. (2011). Can groups be epistemic agents? In H. B. Schmid, D. Dirtes, & M. Weber (Eds.), Collective epistemology (pp. 23–44). Frankfurt: Ontos Verlag.Google Scholar
  75. Miller, B. (2015). Why (some) knowledge is the property of a community and possibly none of its members. The Philosophical Quarterly,65(260), 417–441.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  76. Nathanson, M. B. (2008). Desperately seeking mathematical truth. Notices of the American Mathematical Society,55(7), 773.Google Scholar
  77. Palermos, O. (2014). Knowledge and cognitive integration. Synthese,191(8), 1931–1951.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  78. Palermos, O. (2015). Active externalism, virtue reliabilism and scientific knowledge. Synthese,192(9), 2955–2986.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  79. Palermos, O. (2016). Spreading the credit: Virtue reliabilism and weak epistemic individualism. Erkenntnis,81(2), 305–334.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  80. Palermos, O. (2017). Social machines: A philosophical engineering. Phenomenology and the Cognitive Sciences,16(5), 953–978.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  81. Palermos, O., & Pritchard, D. (2013). Knowledge via epistemic extension and social epistemology. Social Epistemology Review and Reply Collective,2(8), 105–120.Google Scholar
  82. Palermos, O., & Pritchard, D. (2016). The distribution of epistemic agency. In P. Reider (Ed.), Social epistemology and epistemic agency: De-centralizing epistemic agency (pp. 109–126). New York, NY: Rowman & Littlefield.Google Scholar
  83. Pettit, P. (2014). How to tell if a group is an agent. In J. Lackey (Ed.), Essays in collective epistemology (pp. 97–121). Oxford: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  84. Pritchard, D. (2008). Science as collective knowledge. Cognitive Systems Research,9(1–2), 115–124.Google Scholar
  85. Pritchard, D. (2010). Cognitive ability and the extended cognition thesis. Synthese,175(1), 133–151.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  86. Pritchard, D. (2018a). Extended knowledge. In J. A. Carter, A. Clark, J. Kallestrup, S. Orestis-Palermos, & D. Pritchard (Eds.), Extended epistemology. Oxford: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  87. Pritchard, D. (2018b). Extended virtue epistemology. Inquiry,61(5–6), 632–647.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  88. Rolin, K. (2010). Extended justification in science. Episteme,7(3), 215–231.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  89. Schmitt, F. F. (1994). The justification of group beliefs. In F. F. Schmitt (Ed.), Socializing epistemology: The social dimensions of knowledge (pp. 257–287). Lanham, MD: Rowman and Littlefield.Google Scholar
  90. Shieber, J. (2013). Toward a truly social epistemology: Babbage, the division of mental labor, and the possibility of socially distributed warrant. Philosophy and Phenomenological Research,86(2), 266–294.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  91. Smith, L. (2018). The curious case of Ronald McDonald’s claim to rights: An ontological account of differences in group and individual person rights. Journal of Social Ontology,4(1), 1–28.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  92. Staley, K. W. (2007). Evidential collaborations: Epistemic and pragmatic considerations in ‘group belief’. Social Epistemology,21(3), 321–335.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  93. Staley, K. W. (2010). Evidence and justification in groups with conflicting background beliefs. Episteme,7(3), 232–247.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  94. Thagard, P. (1997). Collaborative knowledge. Noûs,31(2), 242–261.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  95. Thagard, P. (2010). Explaining economic crises: Are there collective representations? Episteme,7(3), 66–83.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  96. Tollefsen, D. (2002). Challenging epistemic individualism. Protosociology,16, 86–120.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  97. Tollefsen, D. (2015). Groups as agents. Cambridge: Wiley.Google Scholar
  98. Tossut, S. (2014). Membership and knowledge: Scientific knowledge as a group activity. Episteme,11(3), 349–367.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  99. Tuomela, R. (1992). Group beliefs. Synthese,91(3), 285–318.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  100. Tuomela, R. (2004). Group knowledge analyzed. Episteme,1(2), 109–127.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  101. Tuomela, R. (2011). An account of group knowledge. In H. B. Schmid, D. Dirtes, & M. Weber (Eds.), Collective epistemology (pp. 75–117). Frankfurt: Ontos Verlag.Google Scholar
  102. Vaesen, K. (2011a). Giere’s (In)appropriation of distributed cognition. Social Epistemology,25(4), 379–391.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  103. Vaesen, K. (2011b). Knowledge without credit, exhibit 4: Extended cognition. Synthese,181(3), 515–529.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  104. Vaesen, K. (2013). Critical discussion: Virtue epistemology and extended cognition: A reply to Kelp and Greco. Erkenntnis,78(4), 963–970.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  105. Wagenknecht, S. (2016). A social epistemology of research groups: Collaboration in scientific practice. London: Palgrave Macmillan.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  106. Weatherall, J. O., & Gilbert, M. (2016). Collective belief, Kuhn, and the string theory community. In M. Brady & M. Fricker (Eds.), The epistemic life of groups (pp. 191–217). Oxford: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  107. Wray, B. (2001). Collective belief and acceptance. Synthese,129(3), 319–333.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  108. Wray, B. (2003). What really divides Gilbert and rejectionists? Protosociology,18–19, 363–376.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  109. Wray, B. (2007). Who has scientific knowledge? Social Epistemology,21(3), 337–347.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  110. Wray, B. (2014). Collaborative research, deliberation, and innovation. Episteme,11(3), 291–303.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  111. Wray, B. (2018). How far can knowledge via epistemic extension be extended? The extension between research teams and artifacts. Socially extended epistemology (pp. 11–23). Oxford: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature B.V. 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Ryerson UniversityTorontoCanada

Personalised recommendations