What do you think?
Rate this book
Questions in Christian Philosophy
How Do We Know?: An Introduction to Epistemology
What does it mean to know something? Can we have confidence in our knowledge? Epistemology, the study of knowledge, can often seem like a daunting subject. And yet few topics are more basic to human life. We are inquisitive creatures by nature, and the unending quest for truth leads us to raise difficult questions about the quest itself. What are the conditions, sources and limits of our knowledge? Do our beliefs need to be rationally justified? Can we have certainty? In this primer on epistemology, James Dew and Mark Foreman guide students through this discipline in philosophy. By asking basic questions and using clear, jargon-free language, they provide an entry into some of the most important issues in contemporary philosophy.
175 pages, Paperback
First published March 7, 2014
22 people are currently reading
371 people want to read
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 30 of 41 reviews
May 15, 2014
Well... I'm going against the trend to score this book high because, while it's a reasonable introduction to epistemology, the authors' self-confessed Christian bias is its greatest weakness. When the authors stay away from areas not particularly contentious from a Christian perspective (whatever that is, given the diversity of Christian perspectives) it's reasonably balanced in presenting various options in response to the questions the book addresses. And the authors definitely try to be fair. However, when the book gets to the question of divine revelation, it is inadequate in my opinion. The authors briefly touch on the issue of other religions claiming to have supernatural revelation, but they very quickly move to a narrow Christian focus which describes a common apologetic argument in defence of the authority of the Christian scriptures. There are very significant and contentious issues around a claim that one religion has direct knowledge from “God”. Maybe I'm asking too much of an essentially Evangelical survey of epistemology. My hope is that any reader, including Christian readers, will also explore some of these issues by seeking out introductory texts on epistemology that come from a variety of views.
February 21, 2018
This book made me fall in love with Epistemology. After all how we find knowledge is foundational to life.
March 18, 2014
How do we know what we think we know? Dare we claim to know anything at all about God, or can we speak only about what we believe? Is it time to throw up in our hands and give in to postmodernism?
Don’t buy this book looking for an argument for the existence of God. That’s not the focus. This is a very good introduction to epistemology, with only a light Christian tint. Until the final pages, little is said about knowledge of God, and when we do get to the topic of divine revelation (for that is our primary means of knowing anything about God), the argument for why the Bible story of Jesus is reliable history is unfortunately too brief to be helpful.
Instead, the book hopes to introduce its readers to the philosophy of epistemology–that is, the study of the nature and limits of human knowledge. Dew and Foreman are both associate professors of Philosophy. They start out with the long-standing definition of knowledge as Justified True Belief (JTB), provide a few counter arguments to show the inadequacy of that definition, and then lead into some of the deeper issues. What is truth? Where does knowledge come from? Do we really need justification? How and why do we believe? Does “revelation” count as knowledge? (This may be the most important question in the book for Christians.) And how certain can we be?
These topics are deeper than they sound, but you don’t need any background in philosophy to follow the discussion. If the book sounds dry, it’s not. I confess an interest in this discipline, because it’s not uncommon at all for two people to claim to know contradictory facts, judging themselves to be 100% certain of their knowledge, which only highlights how fallible we humans are. When the topic turns to religion, we affirm our “knowledge” with even more certainty.
In the end, certainty is less attainable than we imagine, and not as necessary as we might think. Most of the really interesting things we believe are things that we could possibly be wrong about.
Strongly recommended especially if you are new to the topic.
Don’t buy this book looking for an argument for the existence of God. That’s not the focus. This is a very good introduction to epistemology, with only a light Christian tint. Until the final pages, little is said about knowledge of God, and when we do get to the topic of divine revelation (for that is our primary means of knowing anything about God), the argument for why the Bible story of Jesus is reliable history is unfortunately too brief to be helpful.
Instead, the book hopes to introduce its readers to the philosophy of epistemology–that is, the study of the nature and limits of human knowledge. Dew and Foreman are both associate professors of Philosophy. They start out with the long-standing definition of knowledge as Justified True Belief (JTB), provide a few counter arguments to show the inadequacy of that definition, and then lead into some of the deeper issues. What is truth? Where does knowledge come from? Do we really need justification? How and why do we believe? Does “revelation” count as knowledge? (This may be the most important question in the book for Christians.) And how certain can we be?
These topics are deeper than they sound, but you don’t need any background in philosophy to follow the discussion. If the book sounds dry, it’s not. I confess an interest in this discipline, because it’s not uncommon at all for two people to claim to know contradictory facts, judging themselves to be 100% certain of their knowledge, which only highlights how fallible we humans are. When the topic turns to religion, we affirm our “knowledge” with even more certainty.
In the end, certainty is less attainable than we imagine, and not as necessary as we might think. Most of the really interesting things we believe are things that we could possibly be wrong about.
Strongly recommended especially if you are new to the topic.
June 27, 2018
Questions concerning knowledge are frequently considered to be unimportant and unnecessary. That being said, every single human that is able to ask questions has at some point in their life asked an epistemological question (this tendency is especially visible amongst teenagers, though this symptom has been known to surface even in grown adults and even some children have shown signs of this tendency.), such as: How do you know? What do I need to know? Can you teach me? Etc. In How do we know?, authors James K. Dew Jr. and Mark W. Foreman introduce the uninitiated reader to the philosophical domain of Epistemology. In this book review I will begin by noting the purpose and intended audience of this book, followed by an overview of how they accomplish their purpose. I will include any critiques or thoughts concerning the contents of this book in my overview. I will conclude with my estimation of the relative worth and utility of this book.
The proposed purpose of this book is to introduce “the major issues in epistemology while also making the discussion as accessible as possible. (p. 8.)” This is done from a distinctly Christian perspective (and, so it seems, the authors have been influenced primarily by Modern philosophy, though we see the influence of Plato and Aristotle on occasion). The book is written for students or laymen who are interested in the philosophical domain of epistemology, but “who have no background in philosophy and lack familiarity with these issues. (p. 9.)”
The book is divided into 10 seemingly unrelated chapters (in the sense that there seems to be little to no reason for the particular order of the chapters). The book concludes with a brief list of suggested reading, for those whose curiosity has been peaked. The book also has a very good index which makes finding particular subjects quite easy. In chapter 1 the authors introduce the subject of the book, describing what will be covered, and explaining, briefly, what the study of Epistemology entails. The second chapter, suggests that the answer to the question “what is knowledge?” just is Justified True Belief. It, therefore, provides an overview of the JTB theory of knowledge, considers the Gettier problems for the JTB theory, and suggests that the Gettier problems can be solved. Though we must keep in mind that this book is an introduction for the uninitiated, it certainly seems odd that a chapter of this nature would not (1) accurately portray Plato’s definition of knowledge (Socrates explicitly rejects the JTB theory in the very same dialogue where it is proposed. For Plato, knowledge just is contemplation of the unchanging forms.), (2) introduce the reader to the Aristotelian-thomistic definition of knowledge (this theory explicitly rejects the JTB Theory, defining knowledge as the intellectual union between the knower and the thing known – that is, the essence/nature of the thing known is united with the mind of the knower. This theory is actually more in line with the true Platonic theory of knowledge than the JTB theory. Indeed, their assumption that the JTB theory of knowledge just is the proper definition of knowledge is, most likely, the cause of a number of other weaknesses in their exposition of epistemology, as I will note later.), and (3) introduce the reader, at least briefly, to Plantinga’s variation of the JTB theory (where “Warrant” replaces “justification”).
In chapter 3 the authors explain four sources of knowledge (reason, experience, testimonies and revelation) and explain why “faith” is not a source of knowledge. They should have categorized revelation as a subcategory of testimony, due to the fact that revelation just is divinely inspired, written, testimony about God’s relation to man, etc. They also should have noted that, strictly speaking, testimony is not a source of knowledge, but of “belief” (belief has been traditionally defined as “voluntary assent to the truth of an affirmation that is proposed as true by a trustworthy authority”. Their explanation of faith is basic, but good. In the fourth chapter the authors consider the question of truth. They first refute the notion that there are no truths, followed by a consideration of the prominent definitions of truth (coherency, correspondence, and pragmatism). They then consider how coherency and pragmatism can be used a tests for truth claims. In chapter 5 the authors consider how inferences are made, how to recognize inferences, the types of inferences and the various errors that can be made when inferring x from y. This chapter is a good introduction to the subject.
In chapter 6 the authors explore three popular theories of perception (Direct Realism, Indirect realism/representationalism, and phenomenalism). They note the advantages and disadvantages of each theory and conclude that the best theory is some form of Direct Realism—probably a form of “Critical Realism”. This section would be helped by an indepth analysis of Étienne Gilson’s work on this subject. In chapter 7 the authors consider the various theories concerning justification (they do not, for some reason, consider Plantinga’s replacement of “justification” with “warrant”). They contrast and compare Internalism vs. Externalism and Foundationalism (classic vs. moderate) vs. Coherentism. They then suggest a way of avoiding the “stalemate” that seems to have installed itself between these divergent theories. One can’t help but wonder if rejecting the JTB theory of knowledge outright might be a better solution. After all the JTB Theory was not accepted by a number of “heavyweights” in the epistemology, including Plato, Aristotle and Aquinas, all of whom made very clear distinctions between “belief” and “knowledge”.
In chapter 8 the authors look at a recently renewed idea (found originally in Plato, Aristotle and Aquinas, among others) of intellectual virtues and how virtue epistemology affects epistemological questions. They begin by considering ancient views of virtue (Plato and Aristotle), as well as early discussions of virtue epistemology (in Aristotle and Aquinas). They also look, and this is one of the best parts of this book, at a number of different intellectual virtues, and how they should affect our search for knowledge and truth. They conclude with some of the advantages of virtue epistemology. Chapter 9 comes as a surprise for those who have read other books on epistemology, but it is a good surprise. In chapter 9 the authors consider a specific type of knowledge, and its sources – religious knowledge (and specifically religious knowledge as found in Christianity). They argue that there are two sources of knowledge about God: (1) Natural Revelation (studied by Natural Theology), and (2) Special Revelation through Jesus-Christ and the Christian Scriptures (studied by Biblical Theology). They provide an interesting look at how we might provide reasons for considering the Christian Scriptures as a reliable source of knowledge. There is one problem with their presentation of Natural Revelation and Natural Theology, and that is their misrepresentation of Aquinas’s views concerning the value of the knowledge that can be gained from natural Revelation (cf. p. 136).
In the tenth and final chapter the authors consider the question of certainty. They begin by explaining the various types of skepticism, followed by a discussion of whether or not we should even expect certainty for the majority of the things we seek to know. This is followed by a brief discussion of the degrees of certainty and the basis for these degrees of certainty. It is unfortunate that their analysis of certainty and the degrees of certainty does not appear to be influenced by their explanation of the the reason that there are degrees of certainty. The nature of the thing being known not only determines how we know it, but the type of certainty we can expect our knowledge of it to have. This tells us how much or how little certainty to expect in the various branches of knowledge. A little more interaction with the Aristotelian-thomistic theory of knowledge, and a little less dependence on the JTB theory of knowledge, would have been quite profitable for this chapter (and for the rest of the book).
All in all this book is a wonderful little introduction to the philosophical domain of Epistemology. Its lacuna’s aside, I would recommend this book as a primer on Epistemology, to be read before taking any courses on the subject. As such, I also think that the authors did a wonderful job of accomplishing their proposed purpose. This book will be most useful for those who have never studied epistemology, and who need (or want) to understand some of the discussions that take place in this difficult yet exciting domain of study.
The proposed purpose of this book is to introduce “the major issues in epistemology while also making the discussion as accessible as possible. (p. 8.)” This is done from a distinctly Christian perspective (and, so it seems, the authors have been influenced primarily by Modern philosophy, though we see the influence of Plato and Aristotle on occasion). The book is written for students or laymen who are interested in the philosophical domain of epistemology, but “who have no background in philosophy and lack familiarity with these issues. (p. 9.)”
The book is divided into 10 seemingly unrelated chapters (in the sense that there seems to be little to no reason for the particular order of the chapters). The book concludes with a brief list of suggested reading, for those whose curiosity has been peaked. The book also has a very good index which makes finding particular subjects quite easy. In chapter 1 the authors introduce the subject of the book, describing what will be covered, and explaining, briefly, what the study of Epistemology entails. The second chapter, suggests that the answer to the question “what is knowledge?” just is Justified True Belief. It, therefore, provides an overview of the JTB theory of knowledge, considers the Gettier problems for the JTB theory, and suggests that the Gettier problems can be solved. Though we must keep in mind that this book is an introduction for the uninitiated, it certainly seems odd that a chapter of this nature would not (1) accurately portray Plato’s definition of knowledge (Socrates explicitly rejects the JTB theory in the very same dialogue where it is proposed. For Plato, knowledge just is contemplation of the unchanging forms.), (2) introduce the reader to the Aristotelian-thomistic definition of knowledge (this theory explicitly rejects the JTB Theory, defining knowledge as the intellectual union between the knower and the thing known – that is, the essence/nature of the thing known is united with the mind of the knower. This theory is actually more in line with the true Platonic theory of knowledge than the JTB theory. Indeed, their assumption that the JTB theory of knowledge just is the proper definition of knowledge is, most likely, the cause of a number of other weaknesses in their exposition of epistemology, as I will note later.), and (3) introduce the reader, at least briefly, to Plantinga’s variation of the JTB theory (where “Warrant” replaces “justification”).
In chapter 3 the authors explain four sources of knowledge (reason, experience, testimonies and revelation) and explain why “faith” is not a source of knowledge. They should have categorized revelation as a subcategory of testimony, due to the fact that revelation just is divinely inspired, written, testimony about God’s relation to man, etc. They also should have noted that, strictly speaking, testimony is not a source of knowledge, but of “belief” (belief has been traditionally defined as “voluntary assent to the truth of an affirmation that is proposed as true by a trustworthy authority”. Their explanation of faith is basic, but good. In the fourth chapter the authors consider the question of truth. They first refute the notion that there are no truths, followed by a consideration of the prominent definitions of truth (coherency, correspondence, and pragmatism). They then consider how coherency and pragmatism can be used a tests for truth claims. In chapter 5 the authors consider how inferences are made, how to recognize inferences, the types of inferences and the various errors that can be made when inferring x from y. This chapter is a good introduction to the subject.
In chapter 6 the authors explore three popular theories of perception (Direct Realism, Indirect realism/representationalism, and phenomenalism). They note the advantages and disadvantages of each theory and conclude that the best theory is some form of Direct Realism—probably a form of “Critical Realism”. This section would be helped by an indepth analysis of Étienne Gilson’s work on this subject. In chapter 7 the authors consider the various theories concerning justification (they do not, for some reason, consider Plantinga’s replacement of “justification” with “warrant”). They contrast and compare Internalism vs. Externalism and Foundationalism (classic vs. moderate) vs. Coherentism. They then suggest a way of avoiding the “stalemate” that seems to have installed itself between these divergent theories. One can’t help but wonder if rejecting the JTB theory of knowledge outright might be a better solution. After all the JTB Theory was not accepted by a number of “heavyweights” in the epistemology, including Plato, Aristotle and Aquinas, all of whom made very clear distinctions between “belief” and “knowledge”.
In chapter 8 the authors look at a recently renewed idea (found originally in Plato, Aristotle and Aquinas, among others) of intellectual virtues and how virtue epistemology affects epistemological questions. They begin by considering ancient views of virtue (Plato and Aristotle), as well as early discussions of virtue epistemology (in Aristotle and Aquinas). They also look, and this is one of the best parts of this book, at a number of different intellectual virtues, and how they should affect our search for knowledge and truth. They conclude with some of the advantages of virtue epistemology. Chapter 9 comes as a surprise for those who have read other books on epistemology, but it is a good surprise. In chapter 9 the authors consider a specific type of knowledge, and its sources – religious knowledge (and specifically religious knowledge as found in Christianity). They argue that there are two sources of knowledge about God: (1) Natural Revelation (studied by Natural Theology), and (2) Special Revelation through Jesus-Christ and the Christian Scriptures (studied by Biblical Theology). They provide an interesting look at how we might provide reasons for considering the Christian Scriptures as a reliable source of knowledge. There is one problem with their presentation of Natural Revelation and Natural Theology, and that is their misrepresentation of Aquinas’s views concerning the value of the knowledge that can be gained from natural Revelation (cf. p. 136).
In the tenth and final chapter the authors consider the question of certainty. They begin by explaining the various types of skepticism, followed by a discussion of whether or not we should even expect certainty for the majority of the things we seek to know. This is followed by a brief discussion of the degrees of certainty and the basis for these degrees of certainty. It is unfortunate that their analysis of certainty and the degrees of certainty does not appear to be influenced by their explanation of the the reason that there are degrees of certainty. The nature of the thing being known not only determines how we know it, but the type of certainty we can expect our knowledge of it to have. This tells us how much or how little certainty to expect in the various branches of knowledge. A little more interaction with the Aristotelian-thomistic theory of knowledge, and a little less dependence on the JTB theory of knowledge, would have been quite profitable for this chapter (and for the rest of the book).
All in all this book is a wonderful little introduction to the philosophical domain of Epistemology. Its lacuna’s aside, I would recommend this book as a primer on Epistemology, to be read before taking any courses on the subject. As such, I also think that the authors did a wonderful job of accomplishing their proposed purpose. This book will be most useful for those who have never studied epistemology, and who need (or want) to understand some of the discussions that take place in this difficult yet exciting domain of study.
January 8, 2025
This book is a really great intro to basic ideas in epistemology and will prime you to understand more detailed work in epistemology. It introduces some pretty profound ideas and explains them so that the common man can understand them, but it feels a bit like a rollercoaster in that just as a conslcept is getting interesting, the topic changes or some questions are left unanswered. This book although not perfect is definitely a fantastic starting point for people interested in the subject.
June 2, 2024
Hard to ask for a better Christian introduction to epistemology, but I will mention a few areas where this otherwise excellent volume could be improved.
1. I think a discussion of fallibilism should be included.
2. There are several places where the authors could have done a better job of representing views they disagree with. Notably, most atheist philosophers believe in moral facts and have a richer ontology than is represented here.
3. I don't think their argument for believing in Scripture as the Word of God is persuasive or plausible for most people. Upending your whole life and metaphysical views because a historically reliable document testifies to miracles does not seem rational to most. Which leads to.. .
4. They need to give much more time to religious experience.
I will recommend this book as it was much better than expected and mostly conforms to what I want an introduction to epistemology (Christian or not) to be.
1. I think a discussion of fallibilism should be included.
2. There are several places where the authors could have done a better job of representing views they disagree with. Notably, most atheist philosophers believe in moral facts and have a richer ontology than is represented here.
3. I don't think their argument for believing in Scripture as the Word of God is persuasive or plausible for most people. Upending your whole life and metaphysical views because a historically reliable document testifies to miracles does not seem rational to most. Which leads to.. .
4. They need to give much more time to religious experience.
I will recommend this book as it was much better than expected and mostly conforms to what I want an introduction to epistemology (Christian or not) to be.
March 15, 2021
Good introductory overview of what epistemology entails. Definitions of terms of interest - knowledge , truth , justification etc are discussed. The book does very well what it sets out to do. But I need to keep in mind that this is just a starting point. I am using the references in the book to dive deeper into the subject.
June 19, 2023
An interesting overview and brief introduction to the philosophy branch of epistemology. I appreciated how this was an introduction, not necessary argument for or against perspectives, and how it even brought in aspects of the Christian faith. Definitely whet my appetite for and I am super curious to dive deeper into it!
August 2, 2017
A great introduction to epistemology.
Used with LU Online: Philosophy and Contemporary Ideas
Used with LU Online: Philosophy and Contemporary Ideas
January 20, 2025
Here’s another volume in the “Questions in Christian philosophy” series that distills what I imagine would be a semester-long class. I enjoyed the earlier one on Logic especially, and found this one on epistemology helpful too. Though I read theological works regularly, this material is new to me. The subject itself, not the author’s writing, can be challenging. At times philosophy has split the hair too finely on what it is to “know”, and yet how powerful is the thought that we can “know” something.
As for the book itself, it’s clearly written. Often the examples are catchy and effective to make the idea clear. I imagine Dew and Foreman would be engaging teachers. The only problem I had with the book is that too often they wouldn’t pick a side. They never failed to give you the strengths and weaknesses of every viewpoint, but it almost seemed like they never champion any one of them. They never really forged their own new way forward either. Since this was newer material for me, perhaps I wanted that feature more than usual. Especially I wanted to know how a Christian ought to think as so many of the philosophers were not Christian. I am not saying they didn’t give information that you could dig out, perhaps, and find your own opinion. But that design would be better for those who are well-versed on the subject. I hope my one criticism of the book is not actually more one of my own self than of the authors, but I’ll leave that to your judgment.
Still, when I have a question on epistemology, I’ll be reaching for this book.
I received this book free from the publisher. I was not required to write a positive review. The opinions I have expressed are my own. I am disclosing this in accordance with the Federal Trade Commission’s 16 CFR, Part 255.
As for the book itself, it’s clearly written. Often the examples are catchy and effective to make the idea clear. I imagine Dew and Foreman would be engaging teachers. The only problem I had with the book is that too often they wouldn’t pick a side. They never failed to give you the strengths and weaknesses of every viewpoint, but it almost seemed like they never champion any one of them. They never really forged their own new way forward either. Since this was newer material for me, perhaps I wanted that feature more than usual. Especially I wanted to know how a Christian ought to think as so many of the philosophers were not Christian. I am not saying they didn’t give information that you could dig out, perhaps, and find your own opinion. But that design would be better for those who are well-versed on the subject. I hope my one criticism of the book is not actually more one of my own self than of the authors, but I’ll leave that to your judgment.
Still, when I have a question on epistemology, I’ll be reaching for this book.
I received this book free from the publisher. I was not required to write a positive review. The opinions I have expressed are my own. I am disclosing this in accordance with the Federal Trade Commission’s 16 CFR, Part 255.
August 31, 2022
This book is a great overview of epistemology from a balanced Christian perspective. The authors skillfully navigate long-debated issues with tact and humility. I highly recommend to any student or reader who in interested in the basics of epistemology.
January 26, 2025
This was an easier read than I expected (I suspect it helped that I read the 'very short introduction to epistemology' book just before. Unfortunately, the chapter I had the highest hopes for (on revelation as a source of knowledge) felt the most sparse and didn't seem to stack up to the rest. But, having read an introduction, I now feel I can get into more detailed works in that area.
December 29, 2020
It is obvious as humans that we know certain things, but knowing things begs a bigger question - How Do We Know? Drs. James K. Dew and Mark W. Foreman provide an introduction to epistemology, or "a branch of philosophy that deals with the nature and sources of knowledge and develops a theory of knowledge. As such, epistemology is also referred to as the study of knowledge."
Many simply won't deal with deeper philosophical ideals. It is not an easy task, and the answers we find often keep us asking for more. For many of us, it is easier to let the professionals deal with such things and we can just go on living. So why is the question of "How Do We Know" so important? Dew and Foreman present he following for consideration:
-Humans depend on knowledge for understanding and living life.
-Human growth is fed by knowledge.
-Knowing the best possible answers to the most important questions in life helps humans to develop to the fullest.
-For Christians, understanding the relationship of knowledge to its source (God) is critical to right understanding and living.
Dew and Foreman produce an accessible introduction to an important question in Christian philosophy. Lay readers, practitioners, and students alike will benefit from its reading.
Many simply won't deal with deeper philosophical ideals. It is not an easy task, and the answers we find often keep us asking for more. For many of us, it is easier to let the professionals deal with such things and we can just go on living. So why is the question of "How Do We Know" so important? Dew and Foreman present he following for consideration:
-Humans depend on knowledge for understanding and living life.
-Human growth is fed by knowledge.
-Knowing the best possible answers to the most important questions in life helps humans to develop to the fullest.
-For Christians, understanding the relationship of knowledge to its source (God) is critical to right understanding and living.
Dew and Foreman produce an accessible introduction to an important question in Christian philosophy. Lay readers, practitioners, and students alike will benefit from its reading.
February 28, 2014
This book is a basic primer in epistemology and addresses the following issues: 1)What Is Epistemology? 2)What Is Knowledge? 3) Where Does Knowledge Come From? 4)What Is Truth, and How Do We Find It? 5) What Are Inferences, and How Do They Work? 6) What Do We Perceive? 7)Do We Need Justification? 8)What Is Virtue Epistemology? 9)Do We Have Revelation?, and 10) How Certain Can We Be?
The book is well written and argued which makes for a great introduction to the field of epistemology. I believe that it accomplishes its goal as a basic primer and has many helpful definitions and discussions on the pros and cons of varying approaches resulting in argument for the inference to the best explanation. I wish they would have added a concluding chapter on how this all fits together as a model for knowledge.
The book is well written and argued which makes for a great introduction to the field of epistemology. I believe that it accomplishes its goal as a basic primer and has many helpful definitions and discussions on the pros and cons of varying approaches resulting in argument for the inference to the best explanation. I wish they would have added a concluding chapter on how this all fits together as a model for knowledge.
April 1, 2015
This introduction to epistemology is very baaic, but helpful if you have not previously studied the subject. I did not know when I purchased the book that the authors were Christian and discussed epistemic issues related to Christianity in the book. Since I am a Christian, it was a pleasant surprise.
I did feel that some parts of the book could have gone into greater detail and depth. It is a very basic overview, but still worth reading.
I did feel that some parts of the book could have gone into greater detail and depth. It is a very basic overview, but still worth reading.
September 15, 2023
Good introduction to epistemology. I had heard of many of the philosophers and their perspectives, but this was a brief, high-level resource to help understand how the different thinkers fit together. It is written from a Christian perspective, so it wards off the "I guess nothing is really knowable, except that we can't know anything" silly business.
May 18, 2014
Great Christian perspective on epistemology.
February 1, 2016
I'm not a professional philosopher, but, I thought this was a very good book. It is written for a novice to the discipline of epistemology.
July 24, 2017
Very helpful.
May 9, 2020
This is actually the second time I have read this book. An excellent introduction to epistemology from a Christian perspective. Very accessible for non-philosophers.
April 23, 2022
Insightful read
March 6, 2014
A while ago I had the opportunity to write a review of Mark Foreman’s A Prelude to Philosophy . I absolutely loved the book – I recommended it to Christians who are becoming interested in philosophy, Christians who are taking philosophy as a college major, Christian philosophy professors, and college ministers who have
students taking philosophy classes. Since I really enjoyed that book and found it useful, I was excited when I heard Foreman was coming out with another book this time on epistemology. And to be completely honest, I had high expectations for this book as well.Overview
How Do We Know? An Introduction to Epistemology was written by Mark Foreman and James Dew. Much like A Prelude to Philosophy this book was written for people with little to no background in philosophy. It is written as a resource for those who desire a general introduction that is neither too technical nor too simplistic. As the authors say:
We attempt to survey the major issues in epistemology in a concise and accessible fashion, giving students the basics of what they need to know to go further in philosophy or for pursuing their own unique disciplines. (13)
Although it is a book written for Christians (many of the examples and illustrations are relevant to most Christian’s lives) I like the fact that it is clear about the notion that so many epistemological views aren’t necessarily Christian or Non-Christian. Very little in this book is strictly Christian- except for the chapter on revelation and the section on Reformed Epistemology. Nevertheless it is a broad introduction that is relevant to just about anybody, Christians and Non-Christians alike, who desire to know about epistemology.
This book includes chapters on:
1. The task of epistemology
2. The nature of knowledge
3. Sources of knowledge
4. Truth
5. Inferences and logic
6. Perception
7. Justification
8. Virtue epistemology
9. Revelation
10. Skepticism and certainty
Pros
1. The Chapter on Virtue Epistemology – Virtue epistemology is a relatively new field (unless on were to count Aristotle’s intellectual virtues) so it probably doesn’t get as much attention as it rightfully should in college philosophy classes. Topic deals with virtues like: Studiousness, Humility, Honesty, Courage, Generosity, Prudence. It would be nice to see this field incorporated into more general epistemology classes as well as general college course curriculum. I can imagine how much university life would change if intellectual virtue became a part of core college curriculum.
2. The Chapter on Revelation – Being something of a Barthian I appreciated the fact that they emphasize (and credit Barth) with the notion that Jesus is the clearest revelation of who God is. They quote him when he says that “Revelation in fact does not differ from the Person of Jesus Christ, and again does not differ from the reconciliation that took place in him.” This idea, that Jesus is God’s self-revelation of himself, plays a major role in their argument for divine revelation. Foreman and Dew argue that if Jesus Christ is in fact the son of God – and because of the resurrection we have good reason to believe he is – then we can believe that Jesus is the greatest revelation of God. If Jesus is the greatest revelation of God the we are within our epistemic rights to see the Bible as a source of divine revelation. Dew and Foreman’s argument (which is a lot tighter than I just presented it) is powerful in that it avoids the circularity of most arguments for biblical revelation. This non-circular argument for Scripture as divine revelation is a useful tool for anybody arguing for the authority of scripture.
3. Fair Presentations of Differing Viewpoints – Each chapter gives charitable presentations of opposing views. For instance the chapter on truth gives fair presentations of coherentism, pragmatism, and the correspondence theory. Each position is presented as having strengths and weakness. The authors end up arguing for a particular view, but always do so fairly always presenting the best cases for the opposing views.
4. Discussion Questions – At the end of each chapter the authors present the readers with several discussion questions based off the chapter. This will definitely help the reader internalize the information they just read. It might also be helpful for homework assignments if this book is being used as a textbook.
Cons
I was thoroughly pleased with this book. I thought the book presented the most important topics in epistemology, it didn’t get bogged down in overly technical discussions, it made good use of primary sources, it was clear, and it was very readable – all that to say it’s a great book. My only critique of the book comes in certain positions that Dew and Foreman land on. For instance I disagree with their conclusion on the issue of perception. They end up making a case for critical realism – the view that genuine knowledge of the world is possible yet there is potential for perceptual and cognitive error. I think this is a intellectually humble and intuitive position. Yet it seems to me that indirect realism or representationalism better accounts for how our physiology actually works. In critical realism, or better yet direct realism, perception is thought to give the perceiver direct access to the thing perceived, yet it seems to me that those things do not actually happen when I perceive something. For example, take my perception of my lap top as I am writing this review. As I am writing, light particles bounce off the object (my white laptop) and activate the rods and cones in my eyes. The rods and cones send an electrical signal through my optic nerve which eventually makes its way to my brain. My brain then converts this electrical image into something that looks something like a white laptop. If this overly simplistic story is somewhat accurate, representing how my physiology actually works, then it really seems as though I am not perceiving an actual white laptop. I am perceiving an idea, which my brain has formed, of a white laptop. If you wanted to, you could mess with the electrical signals in my nervous system and make me perceive a blue laptop, even though I am not sitting in front of a blue laptop. This example serves to show that I am actually perceiving is the idea formed in my mind from the senses, not the object itself. In other words I am perceiving a representation of the world – not the world itself. That is just one example of a position presented in this book that I disagree with.
Conclusion
Even though there certainly are some positions in this book that I hold different views on I thoroughly recommend this book. As far as introductions go, this book is top-notch.
How Do We Know makes good use of primary sources, it is clear, and it very readable, and it presents the most important views in an easy to understand manner.
Even though epistemology is topic basic to everyday life, it can be very intimidating without a good guide. Dew and Foreman are the guides you are looking for. They have written a clear book on one of the muddiest topics in philosophy.
(Note: I received this book courtesy of IVP Academic in exchange for an impartial review.)
January 29, 2025
Epistemology is the branch of philosophy concerned with interrogating how we know what we know. And once that interrogation begins, in earnest, the question typically goes from one of “how we know” to “if we know.” We have five senses, but those are mediated by our brains, which could be giving us a partial picture of what is actually there. Even stranger, thanks to popular cultural products like The Matrix and The Thirteenth Floor we all aware of the “brains in a vat” problem. Also, anyone who’s played a game like The Sims has at least been forced to consider simulation theory.
“How Do We Know” by James K. Dew Jr. and Mark F. Foreman is as gentle an introduction to the subject as one is likely to find. After all, a subject whose very broaching could lead the reader to questioning their own sanity can only be so gentle.
All of the major thinkers and their arguments are considered herein. It goes from Aristotelian considerations of eudaimonic virtue to the Kantian critique of pure reason. It makes concessions to postmodernism’s assaults on traditional schools of thought without favoring or excessively excoriating them. In all, it does a very good job of presenting an extremely complex and perhaps unsolvable problem to the reader coming to the subject cold.
The authors come from a theological background, and their arguments regarding faith and divinity sometimes shade into apologetics. This isn’t a problem, as both are very up front about their beliefs—and very conscious of the arguments against their beliefs. What’s more, the sections on Revelation and Divine Knowledge are separate from the other chapters, and can be consumed apart from the basic meat of the book. I personally didn’t find their inclusion intrusive, and enjoyed reading the arguments and counterarguments regarding the existence of God.
Recommended, especially for those coming to the subject cold.
“How Do We Know” by James K. Dew Jr. and Mark F. Foreman is as gentle an introduction to the subject as one is likely to find. After all, a subject whose very broaching could lead the reader to questioning their own sanity can only be so gentle.
All of the major thinkers and their arguments are considered herein. It goes from Aristotelian considerations of eudaimonic virtue to the Kantian critique of pure reason. It makes concessions to postmodernism’s assaults on traditional schools of thought without favoring or excessively excoriating them. In all, it does a very good job of presenting an extremely complex and perhaps unsolvable problem to the reader coming to the subject cold.
The authors come from a theological background, and their arguments regarding faith and divinity sometimes shade into apologetics. This isn’t a problem, as both are very up front about their beliefs—and very conscious of the arguments against their beliefs. What’s more, the sections on Revelation and Divine Knowledge are separate from the other chapters, and can be consumed apart from the basic meat of the book. I personally didn’t find their inclusion intrusive, and enjoyed reading the arguments and counterarguments regarding the existence of God.
Recommended, especially for those coming to the subject cold.
March 3, 2024
Epistemology Introduction (from Christian perspective)
In this volume, you are introduced to multiple epistemological systems and subsystems. It made for dry reading, but it was so simple and clear it deserves five stars.
Topics Covered:
What is epistemology?
What is knowledge?
-the authors explain justified true belief (JTB) and problems with it (Gettier, Russell )/This section was probably the most helpful for me.
Where does knowledge come from?
-reason
-experience
-testimony
-revelation
-faith
What is truth and how do we find it?
-coherentism
-correspondence theory of Truth
-pragmatism
What are inferences and how do they work?
What do we perceive?
Do we need justification?
-internalism
-externalism
-warrant vs. justification
-proper function
-reformed epistemology
Can we be objective in our view of the world?
What is virtue epistemology?
-This section reminded me of Inman's book, Christian Philosophy as a Way of Life (see that review for more)
Do we have a revelation?
How certain can we be?
B. Grizenko
Age 13+
In this volume, you are introduced to multiple epistemological systems and subsystems. It made for dry reading, but it was so simple and clear it deserves five stars.
Topics Covered:
What is epistemology?
What is knowledge?
-the authors explain justified true belief (JTB) and problems with it (Gettier, Russell )/This section was probably the most helpful for me.
Where does knowledge come from?
-reason
-experience
-testimony
-revelation
-faith
What is truth and how do we find it?
-coherentism
-correspondence theory of Truth
-pragmatism
What are inferences and how do they work?
What do we perceive?
Do we need justification?
-internalism
-externalism
-warrant vs. justification
-proper function
-reformed epistemology
Can we be objective in our view of the world?
What is virtue epistemology?
-This section reminded me of Inman's book, Christian Philosophy as a Way of Life (see that review for more)
Do we have a revelation?
How certain can we be?
B. Grizenko
Age 13+
July 15, 2023
I wanted to take a course in Epistemology in college but it didn't fit in my schedule, so now I finally read a book on it. I don't know how it compares with other books on the topic but I thought it did a good job in presenting the ideas clearly. I'm not sure if I'll read more on the subject but if I do I think I'll be well-prepared for it by this book.
February 12, 2018
Very basic review. Takes a lot for granted. Didn't walk away with much.
July 21, 2018
Had to read this book for my philosophy class.
July 6, 2019
A very good introduction- clear and helpful.
October 21, 2022
Very well written, just too deep for me.
Displaying 1 - 30 of 41 reviews