I had not heard of street epistemology before, but I am glad it has been brought to my attention, the better to defend myself against strangers seeking deep conversations with passers-by. I notice that their “basics” guide linked in the OP makes no reference to the truth of the beliefs the s.e. seeks to undermine, although in fairness, their “complete guide” linked on that site does.
I’d like to see one of these street epistemologists in conversation with someone like, say, J. Budziszewski, someone at least as well-armed as they are.
I had not heard of street epistemology before, but I am glad it has been brought to my attention, the better to defend myself against strangers seeking deep conversations with passers-by. I notice that their “basics” guide linked in the OP makes no reference to the truth of the beliefs the s.e. seeks to undermine, although in fairness, their “complete guide” linked on that site does.
I’d like to see one of these street epistemologists in conversation with someone like, say, J. Budziszewski, someone at least as well-armed as they are.
Holding true beliefs for bad reasons is still bad epistemology.
I had a bet going with myself as to whether the defense of special pleading was going to have religious motivations.
Thanks for bringing his work to my attention, looks very interesting.