Date of Award

1-1-2016

Document Type

Masters Thesis

Degree Name

M.A.

Organizational Unit

Morgridge College of Education

First Advisor

Kathy E. Green, Ph.D.

Second Advisor

Antonio Olmos-Gallo

Third Advisor

Frederique Chevillot

Keywords

Epistemology, Experimental epistemology, Experimental philosophy, Gettier cases, Research methods, Survey design

Abstract

Experimental epistemologists have recently begun using Gettier-type thought experiments to test various philosophic theories. Generally speaking, these thought experiments present a justified, true belief which intuitively does not seem like knowledge. Despite the studies using this same general definition, they have exercised a myriad of different particular Gettier cases and experimental methods. Some results have been conflicting, or otherwise counter-intuitive, and interpretations of their findings have been divergent. The present study was a systematic review of these experiments, with a focus on experimental methods. Studies were compared on readability and factors effecting participant fatigue and comprehension. The results suggest that readability scores and potential for fatigue were inconstant across included studies. Readability scores varied from elementary to college reading level; similarly, some studies presented only a single case to participants, and others presented as many as nine. Ultimately, the present study makes recommendations to future researchers using Gettier-type thought experiments, in hope that better empirical rigor will improve consistency of experimental findings.

Publication Statement

Copyright is held by the author. User is responsible for all copyright compliance.

Rights Holder

Maximilian Popiel

Provenance

Received from ProQuest

File Format

application/pdf

Language

en

File Size

74 p.

Discipline

Epistemology, Experimental Psychology, Philosophy

Download



Share

COinS