title: The Myth of the Given today: Perspectives of realistic epistemology
metadata.name: dc.contributor.author
metadata.value: Nikonenko, Sergey V.
metadata.lang: -
metadata.name: dc.date.accessioned
metadata.value: 2020-11-20T17:53:27Z
metadata.lang: -
metadata.name: dc.date.available
metadata.value: 2020-11-20T17:53:27Z
metadata.lang: -
metadata.name: dc.date.issued
metadata.value: 2020-09
metadata.lang: -
metadata.name: dc.identifier.citation
metadata.value: Nikonenko S.V. The Myth of the Given today: Perspectives of realistic epistemology. Vestnik of Saint Petersburg University. Philosophy and Conflict Studies, 2020, vol. 36, issue 3, pp. 452–459.
metadata.lang: en_GB
metadata.name: dc.identifier.other
metadata.value: https://doi.org/10.21638/spbu17.2020.303
metadata.lang: -
metadata.name: dc.identifier.uri
metadata.value: http://hdl.handle.net/11701/20810
metadata.lang: -
metadata.name: dc.description.abstract
metadata.value: The article deals with the reception of Wilfrid Sellars’s The Myth of the Given. The Problem
  consists in the ontological status of reality and the possibility of empirical knowledge. The
  ideas of well-known representatives of modern analytical epistemology are analyzed: J. Searle, H.Putnam, J.McDowell, G.Evans, C.Peacocke, W.Child, T.Rockmore, etc. An attempt is
  made in the article to show that The Myth of the Given is losing its relevance in modern humanistic realism where the world is already becoming a symbolic construct within the epistemological framework. Experience as such is no longer deemed as a linguistic phenomenon in
  modern epistemology. Sellars’s argumentation is convincing only if universalism, in terms of
  the interpretation of experience and reality, is criticized from the standpoint of radical pluralism of epistemological theories. In this case, indeed, no “Given” exists, viewed as a correlation
  between the substance of Sensitivity and the only possible world of Reality. It is illustrated that
  modern analytical epistemology is an arena of competition between two leading positions in
  the interpretation of the world: externalism and internalism. Despite the contradiction between these theoretical positions, they are in accord in recognizing a pluralistic worldview,
  which is, moreover, of a “humanistic” nature. These theories address neither “the given” nor
  “the world of facts”. The main trouble with The Myth of the Given is the lack of criteria of objectivity in any act of experience.
metadata.lang: en_GB
metadata.name: dc.language.iso
metadata.value: ru
metadata.lang: en_GB
metadata.name: dc.publisher
metadata.value: St Petersburg State University
metadata.lang: en_GB
metadata.name: dc.relation.ispartofseries
metadata.value: Vestnik of St Petersburg University. Philosophy and Conflict Studies;Volume 36; Issue 3
metadata.lang: -
metadata.name: dc.subject
metadata.value: epistemology
metadata.lang: en_GB
metadata.name: dc.subject
metadata.value: analytical philosophy
metadata.lang: en_GB
metadata.name: dc.subject
metadata.value: experience
metadata.lang: en_GB
metadata.name: dc.subject
metadata.value: reality
metadata.lang: en_GB
metadata.name: dc.subject
metadata.value: data
metadata.lang: en_GB
metadata.name: dc.subject
metadata.value: objectivity
metadata.lang: en_GB
metadata.name: dc.title
metadata.value: The Myth of the Given today: Perspectives of realistic epistemology
metadata.lang: en_GB
metadata.name: dc.type
metadata.value: Article
metadata.lang: en_GB
resources.filename: 452-459.pdf
resources.url: https://dspace.spbu.ru/bitstream/11701/20810/1/452-459.pdf
resources.format: Adobe PDF
resources.size: 635,89 kB