In this paper, I examine Steve Fuller＇s ＂sociological＂ social epistemology that must be distinguished from its ＂philosophical＂ counterpart. Fuller＇s sociological social epistemology can prompt deep philosophical...In this paper, I examine Steve Fuller＇s ＂sociological＂ social epistemology that must be distinguished from its ＂philosophical＂ counterpart. Fuller＇s sociological social epistemology can prompt deep philosophical analyses of the conditions for knowledge that themselves bear on what should count as knowledge. That is, it can be a vital prelude to developing an interdisciplinary investigation into educational issues. This paper looks at the three features that form an integral part of Fuller＇s social epistemology, which is partly elucidatory and partly critical： naturalistic, normative, and organizational aspects. It goes on to explore whether and to what extent Fuller＇s criticism of an ＂always already＂ thesis in philosophy and his idea of ＂knowledge management＂ afford an understanding of human knowledge in particular and human development in general. This paper concludes with an observation that Fuller＇s social epistemology is flawed in some respects but nonetheless is of relevance to the philosophical study of education.展开更多
文摘In this paper, I examine Steve Fuller＇s ＂sociological＂ social epistemology that must be distinguished from its ＂philosophical＂ counterpart. Fuller＇s sociological social epistemology can prompt deep philosophical analyses of the conditions for knowledge that themselves bear on what should count as knowledge. That is, it can be a vital prelude to developing an interdisciplinary investigation into educational issues. This paper looks at the three features that form an integral part of Fuller＇s social epistemology, which is partly elucidatory and partly critical： naturalistic, normative, and organizational aspects. It goes on to explore whether and to what extent Fuller＇s criticism of an ＂always already＂ thesis in philosophy and his idea of ＂knowledge management＂ afford an understanding of human knowledge in particular and human development in general. This paper concludes with an observation that Fuller＇s social epistemology is flawed in some respects but nonetheless is of relevance to the philosophical study of education.
