Document Type

Article

Publication Date

1984

Abstract

In his 1983 article, Paul A. Roth defends the Quinean project of naturalized epistemology from the criticism presented in my 1980 article. In this note I would like to respond to Roth's effort. I will argue that, while helpful in advancing and clarifying the issues, Roth's defense of naturalized epistemology does not succeed. The primary topic to be clarified is Quine's "no first philosophy" doctrine; but I will address myself to other points as well.

Comments

The following article appeared in Philosophy of Science 51:4 (Dec 1984) Pages: 667-676. Philosophy of Science © 1984 Philosophy of Science Accociation. Published by The University of Chicago Press on behalf of the Philosophy of Science Accociation. The original publication is available at http://www.jstor.org/stable/187981

Share

COinS