Welcome to the

Laura Rediehs Philosophy Page

Contents

*      Contact Information

*      Teaching

*      Research and Writing

*      Peace and Nonviolence

*      Alternative Grading

*      Musical Interests

 

Research Interests

Science and Religion

  • Comparing Scientific and Religious Knowledge
  • Quaker Epistemology
  • The Rise of Quakerism and the Rise of Modern Science

Philosophy of Science

  • The Nature of Scientific Theoretical Knowledge
  • The Debates Concerning Scientific Realism
  • Incommensurability and Meaning Change
  • History of Philosophy of Science in the 20th Century
  • Metaphysics of Science

Other Philosophy

  • Early Modern Philosophy
  • Kant's Metaphysics and Epistemology
  • Language and Meaning
  • Ethical Theory and the Nature of Goodness

Peace and Nonviolence

  • Theories of Nonviolent Conflict Resolution
  • Relationship between Incommensurability of Worldviews and Conflict Resolution

Selected Current Writing Projects

I presented the following paper duing the Friends Association for Higher Education conference in June 2008, and am currently writing a version to submit as a journal article:

 

  “Quaker Epistemology: A Different Kind of Empiricism?”

Quakerism was taking form at the same time as the rationalism/empiricism debate in philosophy and the rise of modern science. While the early Quakers did not participate very much in these debates at the academic level, an implicit epistemology can be drawn from some of their theological writings.

The predominant summary account of the rationalism/empiricism debate is that empiricism ultimately “won” through the ascendancy of modern science, leaving us no longer in need of the “God hypothesis.” The implication is that the only way to support belief in God, if God does exist, is with some version of rationalism. Sense experience can give us no knowledge of God because God is not a physical being detectable by the senses. The only possible way to have access to knowledge of a supreme spiritual being would be through innate ideas, or through a reasoning process capable of producing substantive knowledge (hence rationalism rather than empiricism).

But, surprisingly, the early Quakers who did write specifically about knowledge (such as Isaac Penington, George Keith, and Robert Barclay) did not seem to be supporting a version of rationalism. They were much too critical of human reasoning. Instead, their implicit epistemology is better described as a version of empiricism that assumes a broader notion of “experience” than we currently assign to empiricism.

In my paper, I describe the version of empiricism I see underlying early Quaker thought, with special attention to different ways of understanding “experience,” and then I discuss the further implications of this epistemology and its relevance for today.

 

 

Last Revised: 8/20/08

by L. Rediehs

Laura Rediehs
Department of Philosophy
St. Lawrence University
Canton, NY 13617