Epistemology reading list

[RamistThomist]

Here is a standard epistemology reading list that covers the basics. These are peer-reviewd academic texts by guys that have zero interest in intramural Reformed debates.

Plato, Meno. Plato only hints at the basic problems between knowledge and opinion, but it is such a fun read.

Nash, Ronald. Word of God and Mind of Man. I disagree with Nash in some places but he is so much fun to read. Deals more with Hume than the technical problems of epistemology. Good section on Augustine.

Wolterstorff. John Locke and the Ethics of Belief. Deals primarily with Book IV of Locke's essay. Technical discussion on how Locke himself failed to meet his own criteria.

Alston, Reliability of Sense Perception. We should adopt a specific world-scheme that trades on an ability to anticipate reliable SP.

Russell, The Problems of Philosophy. Shows that Berkeley did not distinguish between the thought of something and the act of thinking that thought.

Alston, The Perceiving God. He notes that modern epistemology cannot give noncircular defenses for the most basic accounts of knowledge and that religious experience (or Christian Mystical Perception, CP/M beliefs) are far less problematic in terms of epistemic justification.

Alston, A Realist Conception of truth. His Thesis: alethic realism; sees truth in the sense of a statement is true iff what is said to be the case actually is the case (Alston 5).

Audi, Epistemology. Things can serve as sources of belief without intending to serve as foundations.

Plantinga, Warrant and Proper Function. Technical survey of what Gettier hath wrought.

Plantinga, Warrant: The Current Debate. When I know something, must I justify some internal epistemic duty? No.

 

[jwright82]

Thanks man. Ashamed to say I only have one of those.

 

[jwright82]

That John Locke book, is it a good, great, what? Also I have Bush's book on Augustine's epistemology, just started rereading it the other night. Been like 15 years, still fascinating though.

 

[RamistThomist]

That John Locke book, is it a good, great, what? Also I have Bush's book on Augustine's epistemology, just started rereading it the other night. Been like 15 years, still fascinating though.

The Locke book is okay. If you see it cheap, get it. Don't spend a lot on it, though. Locke's Books 1-3 of his Treatise are largely unintelligible. Book IV, though, is a lot of fun and Wolterstorff draws out some themes.

 

[Bill The Baptist]

Locke's Books 1-3 of his Treatise are largely unintelligible.

In speaking of Kant, Plantinga jokes that lack of clarity seems to often be the key to longevity in philosophy. After all, if you clearly stated what you meant, people wouldn’t be able to write books and dissertations purporting to explain what you really meant.

 

[jwright82]

The Locke book is okay. If you see it cheap, get it. Don't spend a lot on it, though. Locke's Books 1-3 of his Treatise are largely unintelligible. Book IV, though, is a lot of fun and Wolterstorff draws out some themes.

I have Locke's book. But I do want Woltersrff's book as well.

 

[RamistThomist]

I have Locke's book. But I do want Woltersrff's book as well.

If you find it under $10, yes. Basically he outlines Locke as an extreme foundationalist who says we must meet evidence for each belief we have (Locke also uses "evidence" in a looser sense than we do).