Skip to main content

Epistemic Humility

A View from the Philosophy of Science

  • Chapter
Wisdom, Knowledge, and Management

Part of the book series: C.West Churchman and Related Works Series ((CWCL,volume 2))

Abstract

If our knowledge of the world is always filtered, interpreted and (in important ways) ‘constructed’ by our a priori faculties then we can never know things as they truly are and we are forced to accept a degree of humility with respect to our ‘scientific’ pronouncements.

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

Access this chapter

Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 189.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 249.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD 249.99
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

Institutional subscriptions

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  • Andersson, G., 1994,Criticism and the History of Science: Kuhn’s, Lakatos’s and Feyerabend’s Criticisms of Critical Rationality, Leiden, New York, USA.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ayer, A., 1959,Logical Positivism, Free Press, New York, USA.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bayes, T., 1763, “Essay towards solving a problem in the doctrine of chances”,Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society of London,53:370–418. Reprinted in Biometrika 45: 293–315, 1958.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bell, J., 1994,Reconstructing Prehistory: Scientific Method in Archaeology, Temple University Press, Philadelphia, USA.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bhaskar, R., 1986,Scientific Realism and Human Emancipation, Verso, London, UK.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bloor, D., 1991, Knowledge and Social Imagery. University of Chicago Press, Chicago, USA.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bohr, N. (1928) “The quantum postulate and the recent development of atomic theory”,Nature,121:580–590.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Bohr, N., 1935, “Can quantum mechanical description of physical reality be considered complete?”,Physical Review,48:696–702.

    Article  MATH  ADS  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Burke, M.M., 2000,Thinking Together: New Forms of Thought Systems for a Revolution in Military Affairs, DSTO Research Report (DSTO-RR-0173), Edinburgh, Australia.

    Google Scholar 

  • Carnap, R., 1928,The Logical Structure of the World, University of California Press, Berkeley, USA. This edition first published, 1967.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cassirer, E., 1923,The Philosophy of Symbolic Forms Volume 1: Language. Translated by Manheim, R. Yale University Press, New Haven, USA. This edition first published, 1953.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cassirer, E., 1925,The Philosophy of Symbolic Forms Volume 2: Mythical Thought. Translated by Manheim, R. Yale University Press, New Haven, USA. This edition first published, 1955.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cassirer, E., 1929,The Philosophy of Symbolic Forms Volume 3: The Phenomenology of Knowledge. Translated by Manheim, R. Yale University Press, New Haven, USA. This edition first published, 1957.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cassirer, E., 1942,The Logic of the Humanities. Translated by Manheim, R. Yale University Press, New Haven, USA. This edition first published, 1961.

    Google Scholar 

  • Chalmers, A., 2000,What Is This Thing Called Science? 3rd ed., University of Queensland Press, St Lucia, Australia.

    Google Scholar 

  • Checkland, P., 1981,Systems Thinking, Systems Practice, Wiley, Chichester, UK.

    Google Scholar 

  • De Bono, E., 1990,I am Right, You are Wrong: From this to the New Renaissance, From Rock Logic to Water Logic, Penguin, Harmondsworth, UK.

    Google Scholar 

  • Einstein, A., 1916, “Die grundlagen der allgemeinen relativitätstheorie” (The foundation of the general theory of relativity),Annalen der Physik,49:769–822.

    Article  ADS  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Feyerabend, P., 1975,Against Method: Outline of an Anarchistic Theory of Knowledge, New Left Books, London, UK.

    Google Scholar 

  • Friedman, M., 1992, “Philosophy and the exact sciences: Logical positivism as a case study”. in: Inference, Explanation, and other Frustrations: Essays in the Philosophy of Science, J. Earman, J., ed., University of California Press, Berkeley, USA.

    Google Scholar 

  • Friedman, M., 2000,A Parting of the Ways: Carnap, Cassirer and Heidegger, Open Court Publishing Company, Chicago, USA.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fumerton, R., 1992, “Phenomenalism”, in: A Companion to Epistemology, J. Dancy & E. Sosa, eds., Blackwell Companions to Philosophy, Oxford, UK.

    Google Scholar 

  • Goodman, N., 1954,Fact, Fiction and Forecast, Harvard University Press, Cambridge, USA. This edition first published, 1983.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hazelrigg, L., 1989,Social Science and the Challenge of Relativism Volume 1: A Wilderness of Mirrors — On Practices of Theory in a Gray Age, University of Florida Press, Gainsville, USA.

    Google Scholar 

  • Heisenberg, W., 1927, “Uber die grundprinzipien der quantenmechanik”,Forschungen und Fortschritte,3:11–83.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hempel, C, 1945, “Studies in the logic of confirmation”,Mind,54:1–26.

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  • Hempel, C, 1965,Aspects of Scientific Explanation.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hempel, C, 1966,Philosophy of Natural Science, Prentice Hall, Englewood Cliffs, USA.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hollway, W., 1989,Subjectivity and Method in Psychology: Gender, Meaning and Science, Sage, London, UK.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hoyningen-Huene, P., 1993,Reconstructing Scientific Revolutions: Thomas S. Kuhn’s Philosophy of Science, University of Chicago Press, Chicago, USA.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hume, D., 1748,An Essay Concerning Human Understanding, Reprint Hackett Publishers, Indianapolis, USA. 1977.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kant, I., 1781,Critique of Pure Reason, translated by Kemp Smith, N. Macmillan, London, UK. This edition first published in 1929.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kuhn, T., 1962,The Structure of Scientific Revolutions, University of Chicago Press, Chicago, USA.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kuhn, T., 1963, “The function of dogma in scientific research”, in: Scientific Change: Historical Studies in the Intellectual, Social and Technical Conditions for Scientific Discovery and Technical Invention, from Antiquity to the Present, A. Crombie, ed., Heinemann Educational Books, London, UK.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kuhn, T., 1970a,The Structure of Scientific Revolutions, 2nd ed., University of Chicago Press, Chicago, USA.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kuhn, T., 1970b, “Logic of discovery or psychology of research?”, in: Criticism and the Growth of Knowledge, I. Lakatos, & A. Musgrave, eds., Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UK.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kuhn, T., 1977,The Essential Tension: Selected Studies in Scientific Tradition and Change, University of Chicago Press, Chicago, USA.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kuhn, T., 1998, “Objectivity, value judgement and theory choice”, in: Scientific Knowledge, J. Kourany, ed., Wadsworth, Belmont, USA.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kuhn, T., 2000,The Road Since Structure, University of Chicago Press, Chicago, USA.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lakatos, I., 1970, “Falsification and the methodology of scientific research programmes”, in: Criticism and the Growth of Knowledge, I. Lakatos & A. Musgrave, eds., Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UK.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lakatos, I., 1977,Philosophical Papers,Volume 1, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UK.

    Google Scholar 

  • Laudan, L., 1996,Beyond Positivism and Relativism: Theory, Method and Evidence, Westview-Harper Collins, Boulder, USA.

    Google Scholar 

  • Midgley, G., 2000,Systemic Intervention: Philosophy, Methodology and Practice, Contemporary Systems Thinking Series, Kluwer Academic/Plenum Publishers, New York, USA.

    Google Scholar 

  • Newton, I., 1704,Opticks, B. Cohen, A., Einstein & E. Whittaker, eds., Dover Publications, New York, USA. This edition first published, 1952.

    Google Scholar 

  • Peirce, C, 1905, “What pragmatism is”,The Monist,15:161–181.

    Google Scholar 

  • Polanyi, M., 1973,Personal Knowledge, Routledge, London, UK.

    Google Scholar 

  • Popper, K.R., 1969,Conjectures and Refutations, Routledge, London, UK.

    Google Scholar 

  • Popper, K.R., 1972,The Logic of Scientific Discovery, Hutchinson, London, UK.

    Google Scholar 

  • Popper, K.R., 1974, “Darwinism as a metaphysical research programme”, in: The Philosophy of Karl Popper, P. Schlipp, ed., Open Court, La Salle, USA.

    Google Scholar 

  • Popper, K.R., 1979,Objective Knowledge: An Evolutionary Approach, revised edition, Oxford University Press, Oxford, UK.

    Google Scholar 

  • Popper, K.R., 1994,The Myth of the Framework: In Defence of Science and Rationality, Routledge, London, UK.

    Google Scholar 

  • Quine, W.V.O., 1953, “Two Dogmas of Empiricism”, in: From a Logical Point of View, Harvard University Press, Cambridge, USA.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ray, C, 2000, “Logical positivism”. in: A Companion to the Philosophy of Science, W.H. Newton-Smith, ed., Blackwell Publishers, Oxford, UK.

    Google Scholar 

  • Reichenbach, H., 1920,The Theory of Relativity and A-Priori Knowledge, University of California Press, Berkeley, USA.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rorty, R., 1979,Philosophy and the Mirror of Nature, Princeton University Press, Princeton, USA.

    Google Scholar 

  • Russell, B., 1912,The Problems of Philosophy, Oxford University Press, Oxford, UK.

    MATH  Google Scholar 

  • Salmon, W., 1970, “Bayes theorem and the history of science”, in: Historical and Philosophical Perspectives of Science, R. Stuewer, ed., University of Minnesota Press, Minneapolis, USA.

    Google Scholar 

  • Schlick, M., 1915, “Die philosophische bedeutung des relativitatsprinzips”,Zeit Fur Phil. Und Phil Kritik,159:129–175. Translated by P. Heath, 1978, in “Moritz Schlick”,Philosophical Papers.

    Google Scholar 

  • Schlick, M., 1918,General Theory of Knowledge, Translated by A. Blumberg, 1974.

    Google Scholar 

  • Trout, J., 2000, “Paradoxes of confirmation”, in: A Companion to the Philosophy of Science, W. Newton-Smith, ed., Blackwell (Blackwell Companions in Philosophy), Oxford, UK.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wittgenstein, L., 1953,Philosophical Investigations, Translated by G. Anscombe, Blackwell Publishers, Oxford, UK.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Authors

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2006 Springer Science+Business Media, LLC

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Matthews, D. (2006). Epistemic Humility. In: van Gigch, J.P. (eds) Wisdom, Knowledge, and Management. C.West Churchman and Related Works Series, vol 2. Springer, New York, NY. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-0-387-36506-0_7

Download citation

Publish with us

Policies and ethics