The Epistemology of Fred Gedicks

Reads: 89  | Likes: 0  | Shelves: 0  | Comments: 0

More Details
Status: In Progress  |  Genre: Non-Fiction  |  House: Anthony Ziuimmerman

Submitted: May 21, 2016

A A A | A A A

Submitted: May 21, 2016

A A A

A A A


Fred Gedicks is an interesting person.He is an academic lawyer, like myself.He is a family man and a Mormon.But,  in spite of all of that,  Fred is blowing it.How?he is using a faulty epistemology that is, philosophy of knowledge.

First,  Fred has cited Derrida for authority when he could have cited Gadamer.Derrida appears to be a nazi, and not a good source to cite.   Derrida invites us to torture, murder, and rape others in his book, "The Force of Law." Also, what is the big deal about interpretation? As Quine tells us, each of us has an interpretive field, known as a coherence field. But, if the center of your coherence field is the cognitive operations of  experience, understanding, judgment, and reflection, then there is not problem at all.   In fact this works rathet well.

Second,  Fred cites Rorty for authority that foudationalism is a fraud, that instead a critical thinker must be a non-foundationalist.   But, Rorty and Gedicks are assuming that the only type of foundationalism that there is is linguistic fouindationalism.  They fail to see that cognitive process foundationalism works and easily survives Rorty's critique. You see, once again, if the knower uses experience, understanding, judgment, and reflection as the basis for  cognitive foundationalism, then threre is not problem at all.

In conclusion, therefore, Fred Gedicks is not paying enough attention to  Lonergan and Fejfar, and is paying to much attention, in the wrong way, to  Derrida and Rorty. 


© Copyright 2017 Anthony Zimmerman. All rights reserved.

Add Your Comments: