Epistemology: Classic Problems and Contemporary Responses

by Laurence BonJour

In Epistemology, Laurence Bonjour introduces the serious philosophy student to the history and concepts of epistemology, while simultaneously challenging them to take an active part in its ongoing debates. The text reflects BonJour's conviction that the place to start any discussion of the theories of knowledge is with the classical problems, beginning with and centered around Descartes. Only after the groundwork for understanding epistemology is laid does BonJour move on to the more contemporary revolutions against the classical approach. A versatile text that can be used in introductory-level epistemology courses, it can also be used by an upper-level epistemology class when supplemented by appropriate readings. This book is not, however, a simple reader of the different theories of knowledge. Epistemology prods students to think independently about the various epistemological approaches presented in the text, and form their own conclusions, thus becoming active participants in the ongoing debate.

Genres: Philosophy, Nonfiction, Textbooks

342 pages, Paperback

First published May 1, 2002

About the author

Laurence BonJour is an American philosopher and Professor of Philosophy at the University of Washington.

His areas of specialty include epistemology, Kant, and British empiricism.

Reviews

[Aung Sett Kyaw Min · Rating 2 out of 5]

Bonjour's preference for moderate rationalism is telling but at least it does not get in the way of his assessment of the 'basic' problems in epistemology such as the nature of a priori insight , external world skepticism etc. Bonjour has some pretty harsh objections lined up against the whole project of naturalized epistemology, Quinean or otherwise (I share his sentiment). Also, given that the first edition came out in 2002 some of the 'contemporary' responses referred to in this book might potentially come across as dated. The highlight of the book is the chapter on the possibility of justificatory relations between sense perception, which is non-conceptual and non-propositional in character, and beliefs, which are conceptual and stand in a web of inferential relations to other beliefs.
Overall this is a tough but fair introduction to epistemology.

[Jenni · Rating 2 out of 5]

In general I respect BonJour as an epistemologist, but this was not a helpful introduction to the basic epistemological issues. While it covers a variety of topics, the organization of the book and explanations of contemporary views is convoluted and confusing. As an intro to epistemology without background knowledge of the field this book would be fairly unhelpful.

[William Schram · Rating 4 out of 5]

Epistemology is a philosophical field dealing with knowledge. Rene Descartes, famed for his Cogito ergo sum statement, originated the central ideas explored in this book.

First, Descartes introduces the notion of rebuilding his knowledge from first principles. What can he know? At the same time, Descartes calls upon the "Evil Genius," a character whose only calling in life is to deceive his senses at every turn. All Descartes has to rely on is his existence. That is where Cogito ergo sum comes into being.

The first half of the book covers Cartesian Doubt and the results from that line of thinking. The second half covers modern responses to the problems raised in the first half.

Author Laurence BonJour does a superb job of explaining the subject and attempting to draw the reader into the conversation. BonJour argues that philosophy is dialectical. The book is a primer for the philosophy student.

BonJour covers various ideas like the Problem of Other Minds, the Gettier Problem, the Problem of Memory, and so on. The end of the book has a bibliography with a description of what each entry covers. The ones with exceptional bibliographies have asterisks next to the author's name.

The physical copy I own contains underlines, markings, and notes in the margins. It makes the book easier to read, and I bought it for a reasonable price.

I enjoyed the book. Thanks for reading my review, and see you next time.

[Ryan Garrett · Rating 3 out of 5]

3.5 stars. Clearly BonJour is a respected and very astute epistemologist whose views are compelling and well-thought of in academia. You can see all of this in this book. He has great thoughts and presentations throughout, along with some convincing arguments. However, at times his complication, verbosity, and organization is overwhelming. He is certainly dense in content but it’s simply too much often and not concise. I would disagree with BonJour on a few issues, BUT that’s not the problem here - it’s the lack of concision. Overall, a worthwhile read on the overall topic - but sometimes it drags with over-complexity. (Maybe just preference as I preferred Feldman on epistemology.)

[David Brooks · Rating 3 out of 5]

While I enjoyed the book, and it was a decent introduction to the topic, it fell a bit flat in specifics. Rather than being a well developed introduction which covered the complexities without delving deep into the subjects, it felt more like a spark notes version of many of the topics. So, not too bad, but not anything really impactful here.

[Christopher Schaffalitzky · Rating 3 out of 5]

It was mandatory literature at my University (I studied philosophy). It's a good enough book. But it over-explains a lot and ends up making it more confusing than it needs to be. There's something irritating about it. I guess it boils down to whether or not you like BonJours' approach or not.

[Nick Murray · Rating 5 out of 5]

Superb introductory book to epistemology. BonJour is a clear, concise, and informative writer that clearly organizes every chapter in a manner that flows well.

[Goines]

too challenging, read jay woods first

[Lukas op de Beke · Rating 5 out of 5]

Bonjour is an extremely gifted epistemologist. Compared to other introductory works to epistemology this book sets itself apart in a positive way by making no use of formal notation. Everything, from the most complicated bits of argument to the simplest beginnings of an epistemological position, is spelled out in beautiful and remarkably easy-to-read sentences. What is also pleasing to find is the amount of space and attention devoted to examining the case of the skeptic, whose power and importance to the dialectic progress in epistemology is often downplayed. For instance, instead of broad-brushing an account of Cartesian skepticism, Bonjour draws careful attention to each step that the argument is made up of. His observations on the putative a priori certainty of so-called sense-data are, in my view, a good example of this, as it seems indeed upon further inspection that this certainty cannot so readily be assumed (can, to spell the objection out in full, the evil genius not make it so that it merely 'seems' as if you are experiencing sense-datum 'x'?).

I should also mention as noteworthy the internalism-externalism (notably reliabilism) and the coherentism-foundationalism debates. At the very end there's the obligatory section on naturalized epistemology

[Alexander Asay · Rating 3 out of 5]

ISU: Epistemology

[Katie]

Grad school read

[Sebastian · Rating 5 out of 5]

Very well written introduction to a very dry topic.