What is your answer?
According to Chisholm, the "empiricist approach" to epistemology starts by assuming an answer to this question:
{ 1 } - "What do we know?"
{ 2 } - "What ultimately exists in the world?"
{ 3 } - "How are we to decide, in any particular case, whether we know?"
{ 4 } - "What is the best and most adequate general conceptual scheme for describing the world?"
<= back | menu | forward =>
Directions: Click on a number from 1 to 4.
1 is wrong. Please try again.
According to Chisholm, the "empiricist approach" to epistemology starts by assuming an answer to this question:
{ 1 } - "What do we know?"
{ 2 } - "What ultimately exists in the world?"
{ 3 } - "How are we to decide, in any particular case, whether we know?"
{ 4 } - "What is the best and most adequate general conceptual scheme for describing the world?"
The rival "commonsense approach" starts by making assumptions about what we know -- for example, that we have genuine knowledge about external objects, mathematics, other minds, God, or moral truths. Then it tries to construct a theory to explain how such knowledge is possible.
The "empiricist approach" doesn't start this way.
<= back | menu | forward =>
2 is wrong. Please try again.
According to Chisholm, the "empiricist approach" to epistemology starts by assuming an answer to this question:
{ 1 } - "What do we know?"
{ 2 } - "What ultimately exists in the world?"
{ 3 } - "How are we to decide, in any particular case, whether we know?"
{ 4 } - "What is the best and most adequate general conceptual scheme for describing the world?"
This question is about ontology.
<= back | menu | forward =>
3 is correct!
According to Chisholm, the "empiricist approach" to epistemology starts by assuming an answer to this question:
{ 1 } - "What do we know?"
{ 2 } - "What ultimately exists in the world?"
{ 3 } - "How are we to decide, in any particular case, whether we know?"
{ 4 } - "What is the best and most adequate general conceptual scheme for describing the world?"
The "empiricist approach" starts by assuming that real knowledge is somehow grounded in experience. On this basis, it tries to decide whether we have genuine knowledge of external objects -- or mathematics -- or other minds -- or God -- or moral truths.
<= back | menu | forward =>
Before continuing, you might try some wrong answers.
4 is wrong. Please try again.
According to Chisholm, the "empiricist approach" to epistemology starts by assuming an answer to this question:
{ 1 } - "What do we know?"
{ 2 } - "What ultimately exists in the world?"
{ 3 } - "How are we to decide, in any particular case, whether we know?"
{ 4 } - "What is the best and most adequate general conceptual scheme for describing the world?"
This question is about metaphysics.
<= back | menu | forward =>
the end