Review of Philosophy and Psychology

, Volume 1, Issue 4, pp 483–498 | Cite as

Folk Epistemology as Normative Social Cognition

  • Benoit Hardy-Vallée
  • Benoît DubreuilEmail author


Research on folk epistemology usually takes place within one of two different paradigms. The first is centered on epistemic theories or, in other words, the way people think about knowledge. The second is centered on epistemic intuitions, that is, the way people intuitively distinguish knowledge from belief. In this paper, we argue that insufficient attention has been paid to the connection between the two paradigms, as well as to the mechanisms that underlie the use of both epistemic intuitions and theories. We contend that research on folk epistemology must examine the use of both intuitions and theories in the pragmatic context of the game of giving and asking for reasons and, more generally, understand how these practices take place within the broader context of normative social cognition.


True Belief Intentional Action Causal Chain Folk Psychology Gettier Case 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.



BHV’s work was supported by a grant from the Social Science and Humanities Research Council of Canada (SSHRC) and BD’s work by the Fonds québécois de recherche sur la société et la culture (FQRSC). We thank Joseph Heath for having us realize the importance of understanding epistemology within the context of pragmatics and normativity, as well as Christophe Heintz, Chad Horne, and an anonymous reviewer for comments on a previous version of the article.


  1. Alexander, J., and J.M. Weinberg. 2007. Analytic epistemology and experimental philosophy. Philosophy Compass 2(1): 56–80.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Aristotle. 1986. On the soul (H. Lawson-Tancred, Trans.). Harmondsworth, Middlesex: Penguin Books.Google Scholar
  3. Barbey, A.K., F. Krueger, & J. Grafman. 2009. An evolutionarily adaptive neural architecture for social reasoning. Trends in Neurosciences 32(12): 603–610.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Belenky, M.F. 1986. Women’s ways of knowing: The development of self, voice, and mind. New York: Basic Books.Google Scholar
  5. Bendixen, L.D., and D.C. Rule. 2004. An integrative approach to personal epistemology: a guiding model. Educational Psychologist 39(1): 69–80.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Brandom, R. 1994. Making it explicit: Reasoning, representing, and discursive commitment. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
  7. Brennan, S.E., and M. Williams. 1995. The feeling of another’s knowing: prosody and filled pauses as cues to listeners about the metacognitive states of speakers. Journal of Memory and Language 34(3): 383–398.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Bunge, S.A., and S.B. Wright. 2007. Neurodevelopmental changes in working memory and cognitive control. Current Opinion in Neurobiology 17: 1–8.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Carruthers, P. 2009. How we know our own minds: the relationship between mindreading and metacognition. Behavioral and Brain Sciences 32: 121–182.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Cosmides, L., and J. Tooby. 2000. Consider the source: The evolution of adaptations for decoupling and metarepresentation. In Metarepresentations: A multidisciplinary perspective, ed. D. Sperber, 53–115. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  11. Davidson, M.C., D. Amso, L.C. Anderson, and A. Diamond. 2006. Development of cognitive control and executive functions from 4 to 13 years: evidence from manipulations of memory, inhibition, and task switching. Neuropsychologia 44(11): 2037–2078.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Descartes, R. 1998. Discourse on method; and, meditations on first philosophy (D.A. Cress, Trans. 4th ed.). Indianapolis: Hackett Pub.Google Scholar
  13. Dewey, J. 1910. The influence of Darwin on philosophy, and other essays in contemporary thought. New York: H. Holt and company.Google Scholar
  14. Flavell, J.H. 1979. Metacognition and cognitive monitoring: a new area of cognitive-developmental inquiry. American Psychologist 34: 906–911.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Gettier, E.L. 1963. Is justified true belief knowledge? Analysis 23(6): 121–123.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Gobbini, M.I., A.C. Koralek, R.E. Bryan, K.J. Montgomery, and J.V. Haxby. 2007. Two takes on the social brain: a comparison of theory of mind tasks. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience 19(11): 1803–1814.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Goldman, A.I. 1999. Knowledge in a social world. Oxford: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Haidt, J., and M.A. Hersh. 2001. Sexual morality: the cultures and emotions of conservatives and liberals. Journal of Applied Social Psychology 31(1): 191–221.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Heath, J. 2008. Following the rules: Practical reasoning and deontic constraint. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  20. Hofer, B.K. 2001. Personal epistemology research: implications for learning and teaching. Educational Psychology Review 13(4): 353–383.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Hofer, B.K. 2004. Epistemological understanding as a metacognitive process: thinking aloud during online searching. Educational Psychologist 39(1): 43–55.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Hofer, B.K., and P.R. Pintrich. 2002. Personal epistemology: The psychology of beliefs about knowledge and knowing. Mahwah: Erlbaum.Google Scholar
  23. Karabenick, S., and S. Moosa. 2005. Culture and personal epistemology: U.S. and Middle Eastern students beliefs about scientific knowledge and knowing. Social Psychology of Education 8: 375–393.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. King, P.M., and K.S. Kitchener. 2004. Reflective judgment: theory and research on the development of epistemic assumptions through adulthood. Educational Psychologist 39(1): 5–18.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Kitchener, K.S. 1983. Cognition, metacognition, and epistemic cognition. A three-level model of cognitive processing. Human Development 26(4): 222–232.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Kitchener, R.F. 2002. Folk epistemology: an introduction. New Ideas in Psychology 20(2–3): 89–105.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Knobe, J. 2006. The concept of intentional action: a case study in the uses of folk psychology. Philosophical Studies 130(2): 203–231.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Koriat, A. 2000. The feeling of knowing: some metatheoretical implications for consciousness and control. Consciousness and Cognition 9(2): 149–171.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Koriat, A., H. Maayan, and R. Nussinson. 2006. The intricate relationships between monitoring and control in metacognition: lessons for the cause-and-effect relation between subjective experience and behavior. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General 135(1): 36–69.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Kuhn, D. 1992. Thinking as argument. Harvard Educational Review 62(2): 155–178.Google Scholar
  31. Kuhn, D. 2001. How do people know? Psychological Science 12(1): 1–8.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. MacDonald, A.W., J.D. Cohen, V.A. Stenger, and C.S. Carter. 2000. Dissociating the role of the dorsolateral prefrontal and anterior cingulate cortex in cognitive control. Science 288(5472): 1835–1838.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Malle, B.F. 2001. Folk explanations of intentional action. In Intentions and intentionality: Foundations of social cognition, ed. B.F. Malle, L.J. Moses, and D.A. Baldwin, 265–286. Cambridge: MIT.Google Scholar
  34. Malle, B.F. 2007. Attributions as behavior explanations: Toward a new theory. In Current themes and perspectives in social psychology, ed. D. Chadee, and J. Hunter, 3–26. St. Augustine: SOCS, The University of the West Indies.Google Scholar
  35. Nagel, J. 2007. Epistemic intuitions. Philosophy Compass 2(6): 792–819.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Nelson, T.O., and L. Narens. 1990. Metamemory: A theoretical framework and new findings. In The psychology of learning and motivation, vol. 26, ed. G. Bower, 125–141. New York: Academic.Google Scholar
  37. Nelson, T.O., & L. Narens. (1994). Why investigate metacognition? In Meta-cognition: Knowing about knowing, eds. J. Metcalfe and A. Shimamura, 1–25.Google Scholar
  38. Nisbett, R.E., K. Peng, I. Choi, and A. Norenzayan. 2001. Culture and systems of thought: holistic versus analytic cognition. Psychological Review 108(2): 291–310.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Nummenmaa, L., and A.J. Calder. 2009. Neural mechanisms of social attention. Trends in Cognitive Sciences 13(3): 135–143.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Palmer, B., and R.M. Marra. 2004. College student epistemological perspectives across knowledge domains: a proposed grounded theory. Higher Education 47(3): 311–335.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Perry, W.G. 1970. Forms of intellectual and ethical development in the college years: A scheme. New York: Holt.Google Scholar
  42. Piaget, J. 1950. Introduction à l’épistémologie génétique. Paris: Presses universitaires de France.Google Scholar
  43. Pintrich, P.R., C. Wolters, and G. Baxter. 2000. Assessing metacognition and self-regulated learning. In Issues in the measurement of metacognition, ed. G. Schraw, and J.C. Impara, 43–97. Lincoln: Buros Institute of Mental Measurements.Google Scholar
  44. Proust, J. 2007. Metacognition and metarepresentation: is a self-directed theory of mind a precondition for metacognition? Synthese 159(2): 271–295.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Schommer, M. 1994. Synthesizing epistemological belief research: tentative understandings and provocative confusions. Educational Psychology Review 6(4): 293–319.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Schommer-Aikins, M. 2004. Explaining the epistemological belief system: introducing the embedded systemic model and coordinated research approach. Educational Psychologist 39(1): 19–29.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. Schommer-Aikins, M., and R. Hutter. 2002. Epistemological beliefs and thinking about everyday controversial issues. Journal of Psychology 136(1): 5.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. Sellars, W. 1956. Empiricism and the philosophy of mind. Cambridge: Harvard University Press. 1997.Google Scholar
  49. Sperber, D. 2001. An evolutionary perspective on testimony and argumentation. Philosophical Topics 29: 401–413.Google Scholar
  50. Sterelny, K. 2006. Folk logic and animal rationality. In Rational animals? ed. S. Hurley, and M. Nudds, 293–312. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  51. Stich, S.P., and I. Ravenscroft. 1994. What is folk psychology? Cognition 50: 447–468.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. Stueber, K.R. 2006. Rediscovering empathy: Agency, folk psychology, and the human sciences. Cambridge: MIT.Google Scholar
  53. Unger, R.K. 1992. Will the real sex difference please stand up? Feminism Psychology 2(2): 231–238.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  54. Weinberg, J.M., S. Nichols, and S.P. Stich. 2001. Normativity and epistemic intuitions. Philosophical Topics 29(1and2): 429–460.Google Scholar
  55. Weinberg, J.M., S. Nichols, and S.P. Stich. 2003. Metaskepticism: Meditations in ethno-epistemology. In The skeptics: Contemporary essays, ed. S. Luper, 227–247. Aldershot: Ashgate.Google Scholar
  56. Whitmire, E. 2004. The relationship between undergraduates’ epistemological beliefs, reflective judgment, and their information-seeking behavior. Information Processing and Management 40(1): 97–111.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  57. Wright, C. 2000. Self-knowledge: The Wittgensteinian legacy. In Knowing our own minds, ed. C. Wright, B. Smith, and C. Macdonald. Oxford: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media B.V. 2009

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Decision Support ServicesSBR GlobalTorontoCanada
  2. 2.Department of philosophyUniversité du Québec à MontréalMontréalCanada

Personalised recommendations