将合理信仰作为教育的认识论目标

Jonas Pfister
{"title":"将合理信仰作为教育的认识论目标","authors":"Jonas Pfister","doi":"10.1093/jopedu/qhae027","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"\n Critical thinking is considered to be a central epistemic aim of education. The claim may be about skills, but also about the state of justified belief. In opposition to this latter view, Alvin Goldman (1999) claimed that justification is only a means to true belief and that the only fundamental epistemic aim of education is true belief. Harvey Siegel’s (2005) response defended the view that justified belief is in fact a fundamental epistemic aim of education. In a recent article, Alessia Marabini and Luca Moretti (2020) analyze Siegel’s arguments, reject all of them, and provide two new ones. I defend one of Siegel’s arguments against their objection, raise some doubts about one of their own arguments, and give an additional argument against Goldman’s view.","PeriodicalId":506406,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Philosophy of Education","volume":"105 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-03-26","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Justified Belief as an Epistemic Aim of Education\",\"authors\":\"Jonas Pfister\",\"doi\":\"10.1093/jopedu/qhae027\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"\\n Critical thinking is considered to be a central epistemic aim of education. The claim may be about skills, but also about the state of justified belief. In opposition to this latter view, Alvin Goldman (1999) claimed that justification is only a means to true belief and that the only fundamental epistemic aim of education is true belief. Harvey Siegel’s (2005) response defended the view that justified belief is in fact a fundamental epistemic aim of education. In a recent article, Alessia Marabini and Luca Moretti (2020) analyze Siegel’s arguments, reject all of them, and provide two new ones. I defend one of Siegel’s arguments against their objection, raise some doubts about one of their own arguments, and give an additional argument against Goldman’s view.\",\"PeriodicalId\":506406,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Philosophy of Education\",\"volume\":\"105 1\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-03-26\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Philosophy of Education\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1093/jopedu/qhae027\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Philosophy of Education","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1093/jopedu/qhae027","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

批判性思维被认为是教育的核心认识目标。这种主张可能是关于技能的,也可能是关于正当信念的。阿尔文-戈德曼(Alvin Goldman,1999 年)反对后一种观点,认为合理性只是通向真正信念的一种手段,教育的唯一基本认识论目标是真正的信念。Harvey Siegel(2005 年)在回应中捍卫了这样一种观点,即合理信念实际上是教育的基本认识论目标。在最近的一篇文章中,阿莱西亚-马拉比尼和卢卡-莫雷蒂(2020)分析了西格尔的论点,否定了其中的所有论点,并提出了两个新的论点。针对他们的反对意见,我为西格尔的一个论点进行了辩护,对他们自己的一个论点提出了一些疑问,并针对戈德曼的观点提出了一个补充论点。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Justified Belief as an Epistemic Aim of Education
Critical thinking is considered to be a central epistemic aim of education. The claim may be about skills, but also about the state of justified belief. In opposition to this latter view, Alvin Goldman (1999) claimed that justification is only a means to true belief and that the only fundamental epistemic aim of education is true belief. Harvey Siegel’s (2005) response defended the view that justified belief is in fact a fundamental epistemic aim of education. In a recent article, Alessia Marabini and Luca Moretti (2020) analyze Siegel’s arguments, reject all of them, and provide two new ones. I defend one of Siegel’s arguments against their objection, raise some doubts about one of their own arguments, and give an additional argument against Goldman’s view.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信