Essay Problem of the Critierion – Distinguished Between a Priori and a Posteriori Knowledge – Arts and Humanities Assignment Help

Assignment Task :

Essay Assignment: Write a (2500 word) essay on one of the following topics. 

1. Skepticism, is very long-standing and powerful epistemological position put forward by philosophers as varied as Sextus Empiricus, Descartes (at least methodically), Hume and Gettier. Define what Skepticism holds, and critically assess whether any of the efforts to secure a so-called ‘criterion of knowledge’ discussed throughout the semester have successfully countered the Skeptic’s challenge? Why or why not? 

2. Roderick Chisholm addresses the so-called ‘Problem of the Critierion’ by making common cause with Moore’s so-called ‘Common Sense’ approach. He and Moore are both dependent on a very specific and narrow defence of their shared faith in common sense, which was identified and discussed in the reading by William Lycan. What is the ‘Problem of the Criterion’, and how does Chisholm address it? Is the Moorean defence held out by Moore and Chisholm persuasive. Why or why not? 

3. Philosophers have traditionally distinguished between a priori and a posteriori knowledge. What are a priori and posteriori knowledge, and is there any a priori knowledge? Why or why not? 

4. Naturarlized Epistemologists propose that we may approach epistemological questions in a broadly empirical spirit. Yet most philosophers have tended to hold that empirical sciences are purely descriptive, and thus that the traditional normative quest for an a priori ‘criterion of knowledge’ cannot effectively be satisfied by the empirical sciences. Is epistemology irreducibly normative, or are the Naturalists right in holding that it is empirical in nature? Provide an argument for your response. 

5. Epistemologists often make use of imagined thought experiments, e.g. Gettier cases, fake barns, Mr Truetemp. Such thought experiments are meant to elicit intuitions that we may have about knowledge or justified belief. What role does intuition play in epistemology, and what bearing does this have on the nature of epistemology? Should intuitions be granted a role in epistemology? Provide an argument for your responses.