This article tackles the problem of normativity in naturalism and considers it in the context of the philosophy of historiography. I argue that strong naturalism is inconsistent with genuine normativity. The strong naturalist faces a difficult dilemma. If he rejects any reliance on conceptual intuitions, his epistemic inquiries will not get off the ground. As a consequence, his analyses of historiography are, in effect, normatively irrelevant: any practice is epistemically as valuable as any other. Another option for the strong naturalist is to relax methodological requirements and accept that epistemic inquiries may begin with nonempirical conceptual reflection or a priori reasoning.
BloorDavid. 1991. Knowledge and Social Imagery. 2nd ed.Chicago: Chicago University Press.
11.
BloorDavid. 1997. Wittgenstein, Rules and Institution. London: Routledge.
12.
BoghossianPaulPeacockeChristopher, eds. 2000. New Essays on the A Priori. Oxford: Clarendon Press.
13.
BrandomRobert. 1997. “Replies.” Philosophy and Phenomenological Research57:189-204.
14.
BrandomRobert. 1998. Making It Explicit: Reasoning, Representing & Discursive Commitment. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.
15.
BrandomRobert. 2000. Articulating Reasons: An Introduction to Inferentialism. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.
16.
ClarkChristopher. 2012. Sleepwalkers. How Europe Went to War in 1914. London: Penguin.
17.
DretskeFred. 1981. Knowledge and the Flow of Information. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
18.
FeldmanRichard. 1999. “Methodological Naturalism in Epistemology.” In The Blackwell Guide to Epistemology, edited by GrecoJ.SosaE., 170-86. Malden, MA: Blackwell Publishing.
19.
FieldHartry. 2000. “A Priority as an Evaluative Notion.” In New Essays on the A Priori, edited by BoghossianP.PeacockeC., 117-49. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
20.
GoldmanAlvin. 1967. “A Causal Theory of Knowing.” The Journal of the Philosophy64: 357-372.
21.
GoldmanAlvin. 1979. “What is Justified Belief.” In Justification and Knowledge: New Studies in Epistemology, edited by PappasGeorge. Dordrecht: Reidel, 1-23.
22.
GoldmanAlvin. 1999. “A Priori Warrant and Naturalistic Epistemology: The Seventh Philosophical Perspectives Lecture.” Philosophical Perspectives13:1-28.
23.
GoldmanAlvin. 2013. “Philosophical Naturalism and Intuitional Methodology.” In The A Priori in Philosophy, edited by CasulloA.ThurowJ. C., 11-45. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
HempelCarl G.1942. “The Function of General Laws in History.” The Journal of Philosophy39:35-48.
29.
HobsbawmEric. 1995. The Age of Extremes: The Short Twentieth Century: 1914-1991. London: Abacus.
30.
KantImmanuel. (1787) 1965. Critique of Pure Reason. Translated by SmithNorman Kemp. New York: St. Martin’s Press.
31.
KimJaegwon. 1988. “What Is Naturalized Epistemology?” In Philosophical Perspectives, edited by TomberlinJ. E., vol. 2, 381-406. Atascadero: Ridgeview.
32.
KitcherPhilip. 1980. “A Priori Knowledge.” The Philosophical Review86:3-23.
33.
KornblithHilary. 2002. Knowledge and Its Place in Nature. New York: Oxford University Press.
34.
KornblithHilary. 2014. A Naturalist Episremology: Selected Papers. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
35.
KuhnThomas. 1970 [1962]. The Structure of Scientific Revolutions. 2nd ed.Chicago: The University of Chicago Press.
36.
KuhnThomas. 1977. The Essential Tension: Selected Studies in Scientific Tradition and Change. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
37.
KuhnThomas. 2000. The Road since Structure. Edited by ConantJ.HaugelandJ. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press.
38.
KuukkanenJouni-Matti. 2007. “Kuhn, the Correspondence Theory of Truth and Coherentist Epistemology.” Studies in History and Philosophy of Science38:555-66.
39.
KuukkanenJouni-Matti. 2012. “Autonomy and Objectivity of Science.” International Studies in the Philosophy of Science26:309-34.
40.
KuukkanenJouni-Matti. 2015. Postnarrativist Philosophy of Historiography. London: Palgrave Macmillan.
41.
KuukkanenJouni-Matti, ed. Forthcoming. Philosophy of History: Twenty-First Century Perspectives. London: Bloomsbury.
42.
LehrerKeith. 1990. Theory of Knowledge. Boulder: Westview Press.
43.
LonginoHelen. 1990. Science as Social Knowledge: Values and Objectivity in Scientific Inquiry. Princeton: Princeton University Press.
44.
MillikanRuth. 1984. “Naturalistic Reflections on Knowledge.” Pacific Philosophical Quarterly65: 315-334.
45.
NozickRobert. 1983. Philosophical Explanation. Cambridge, MA: The Belnap Press of Harvard University Press.
PeacockeChristopher. 2000. “Explaining the A Priori: The Programme of Moderate Rationalism.” In New Essays on the A Priori, edited by BoghossianP.PeacockeC., 255–85. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
49.
QuineW. V. O.1969. “Epistemology Naturalized.” In Ontological Relativity and Other Essays, edited by QuineW. V. O., 69-90. New York: Columbia University Press.
50.
RescherNicholas. 1988. Rationality. A Philosophical Inquiry into the Nature and the Rationale of Reason. Oxford: Clarendon Press.
51.
RothPaul. 2006. “Naturalism without Fears.” In Handbook of the Philosophy of Science. Vol. 15: Philosophy of Anthropology and Sociology, edited by TurnerS.RisjordM., 683-709. Dordrecht: Elsevier.
52.
RothPaul. 2011. “The Philosophy of Social Science in the Twentieth Century: Analytic Traditions: Reflections on Rationalitätstreit.” In The Sage Handbook of the Philosophy of Social Sciences, edited by Zamora-BonillaJesusJarvieIan, eds., 103-118. London: Sage.
53.
RothPaul. 2016. “Back to the Future: Postnarrativist Historiography and Analytic Philosophy of History.” History & Theory55:270-81.
54.
RothPaul. 2017. “Essentially Narrative Explanations.” Studies in History and Philosophy of Sciences62:42-50.
55.
RothPaul. 2018. “Reviving Analytical Philosophy of History.” In Towards a Revival of Analytical Philosophy of History: Around Paul A. Roth’s Vision of Historical Sciences, edited by BrzechczynK., 9-28. Leiden. Brill.
