Identify the difference between externalism and internalism in science. Give examples of each

The internalism-externalism (I-E) debate lies near the center of contemporary discussion about epistemology. The basic idea of internalism is that justification is solely determined by factors that are internal to a person. Externalists deny this, asserting that justification depends on additional factors that are external to a person. A significant aspect of the I-E debate involves setting out exactly what counts as internal to a person.

Identify the difference between externalism and internalism in science. Give examples of each.

Externalism explains the development of science to external causes (polit., An ideal-mi, mi-social, and cultural sotso) external drive.

Internalism development of science has an internal (immonentny) character.

But both right, the principle of complementarity. Externalism - the direction in historiography and the theory of scientific development, according to which science as a system of knowledge and a social institution is immanent, chastyusotsiokultury their limits, and therefore feels on the part of a significant impact as a whole and as a collection of subsystems. It is impossible to explain the internal causes, such as the creation of geometry as a theoretical system of knowledge.

Internalism (from the Latin internus - internal) recognizes the driving force behind the development of science-related factors intrinsic nature of scientific knowledge: the logic of the solution to his problems, the relation of tradition and innovation (the main driving force for the development of science constitute the internal needs of the science itself, its goals, problems and research programs). The development of science can be regarded as a self-organizing process of the interaction of various forms and elements of scientific knowledge, which does not depend on any external factors.

Grandma, Timmy and Lassie

The main problem with appeal to cases like Grandma, Timmy, and Lassie is that the details of such cases are open to interpretation. Internalists argue that when the cases are properly unpacked either these are not cases of justification or there is internalist justification (see “Internalist Response” immediately below). In an attempt to strengthen the argument for externalism some externalists appeal to non-standard cases. One non-standard case is the chicken-sexer case. Chicken-sexers are individuals that possess the unique ability to reliably sort male from female chickens. As the case is described chicken-sexers do not know how they sort the chickens. They report not being able to offer the criteria they use to sort the chickens. Nonetheless they are very good at sorting chickens and their beliefs that this is a male, this is a female, etc., are justified even though they lack internalist justification.

Another non-standard case is the case of quiz-show knowledge. The case envisions a contestant, call her Sally, on a popular quiz show that gets all the answers right. When a clue is offered Sally rings in with the correct answer. She’s quite good at this. Intuitively Sally knows the answers to the clues; yet from Sally’s perspective the answers just pop into her head. Moreover, Sally may believe that she does not know the answer.

What should we say about this case? Sally is very reliable. Her answers are objectively likely to be true.