Pluralism, relativism, and van Fraassian stances
Scientific pluralism does not entail epistemic relativism; the usual 'renunciation of judgment' contrast fails.
Source
Notes on a complicated relationship: scientific pluralism, epistemic relativism, and stances
Study at a glance
- Design
- Other — Epistemology arguing scientific pluralism does not entail epistemic relativism
- N
- Philosophy of science; not an empirical sample
- Population
- Scientific pluralism and epistemic relativism as stances in philosophy of science
- Outcome
- Failed one-dimensional entailment and flawed ‘renunciation of judgment’ contrasts
Structured fields used in claim comparison tables when every cited study has a complete layer.
What they did
They dismantle two standard pluralist demarcations from epistemic relativism (renunciation of judgment; epistemic values), then treat scientific pluralism and epistemic relativism as van Fraassian stances whose friction is over VEPPs and levels of analysis.
What they found
Relativists do not renounce judgment (it stays inside an epistemic system); values push relativism to the choice of values; some SP and ER versions can combine, but there is no one-dimensional entailment from SP to ER.
The limits
What it doesn't show
It is a 'hammer and chisel' overview: it does not etch every author's VEPP package, nor prove which stance-pairings must always hold.
Key terms
- Scientific pluralism (SP)
- Non-monism plus a favourable attitude toward a plurality of theories, explanations, or methods.
- Epistemic relativism (ER)
- View that epistemic status is relative to an epistemic system or bundle, without absolute warrant.
- Renunciation of judgment (RoJ)
- Charge that relativists cannot rank theories; the author denies card-carrying relativists do this.
- Equal validity
- Strong symmetry reading that all epistemic systems are equally good; argued to be unavailable to relativists.
- Stance
- Van Fraassian cluster of attitudes, commitments, and policies (VEPPs), not a mere necessary-and-sufficient doctrine.
- VEPPs
- Values, emotions, and policies that, with some beliefs, make up a philosophical stance.
Flashcards
Research intelligence for this paper
See its role on concept claims, tensions it is part of, placement history, and related discoveries.
Quiz yourself
The 'renunciation of judgment' contrast is said to
Common questions
Does scientific pluralism entail epistemic relativism?
No. Some versions are compatible, but there is no one-dimensional entailment; pluralists often skip symmetry or exclusiveness, relativists may skip acceptance or non-monism.
Why does RoJ fail as a contrast?
Relativists still judge, but within an epistemic system; they also typically reject 'equal validity' because it would be an absolutist ranking.
Why don't epistemic values immunize SP?
Choosing among value-sets reintroduces relativity at the level of value choice.
Why invoke stances?
If the live disagreements are policies and emphasis, necessary-and-sufficient checklists miss the friction.
More on Philosophy of science