Editing Epistemology (section)

=== Knowledge in particular domains ===
Some branches of epistemology focus on knowledge within specific academic disciplines. The [[epistemology of science]] examines how scientific knowledge is generated and what problems arise in the process of validating, justifying, and interpreting scientific claims. A key issue concerns the problem of how [[Problem of induction|individual observations can support universal scientific laws]]. Other topics include the nature of scientific evidence and the aims of science.<ref>{{multiref | {{harvnb|McCain|Kampourakis|2019|pp=[https://books.google.com/books?id=wlAPEAAAQBAJ&pg=PR13 xiii–xiv]}} | {{harvnb|Bird|2010|p=[https://www.jstor.org/stable/40801354 5]}} | {{harvnb|Merritt|2020|pp=[https://www.cambridge.org/core/books/abs/philosophical-approach-to-mond/epistemology-of-science/065BF49E6DE64BA37364BA90542815D0 1–2]}} }}</ref> The epistemology of mathematics studies the origin of mathematical knowledge. In exploring how mathematical theories are justified, it investigates the role of proofs and whether there are empirical sources of mathematical knowledge.<ref>{{multiref | {{harvnb|Murawski|2004|pp=571–572}} | {{harvnb|Sierpinska|Lerman|1996|pp=[https://link.springer.com/chapter/10.1007/978-94-009-1465-0_23 827–828]}} }}</ref>

Distinct areas of epistemology are dedicated to specific sources of knowledge. Examples are the epistemology of perception,<ref>{{harvnb|Siegel|Silins|Matthen|2014|p=781}}</ref> the epistemology of memory,<ref>{{harvnb|Conee|1998|loc=Lead section}}</ref> and the [[epistemology of testimony]].<ref>{{harvnb|Pritchard|2004|p=[https://www.jstor.org/stable/3050633 326]}}</ref> In the epistemology of perception, [[Direct and indirect realism|direct and indirect realists]] debate the connection between the perceiver and the perceived object. Direct realists say that this connection is direct, meaning that there is no difference between the object present in perceptual experience and the physical object causing this experience. According to indirect realism, the connection is indirect, involving mental entities, like ideas or sense data, that mediate between the perceiver and the external world. The contrast between direct and indirect realism is important for explaining the nature of [[illusion]]s.<ref>{{multiref | {{harvnb|Brown|1992|p=341}} | {{harvnb|Crumley II|2009|pp=268–269, 277–278, 300–301}} }}</ref>

Epistemological issues are found in most areas of philosophy. The [[epistemology of logic]] examines how people know that an [[argument]] is [[Validity (logic)|valid]]. For example, it explores how logicians justify that [[modus ponens]] is a correct [[rule of inference]] or that all [[contradictions]] are false.<ref>{{harvnb|Warren|2020|loc=§ 6. The Epistemology of Logic}}</ref> [[Epistemology of metaphysics|Epistemologists of metaphysics]] investigate whether knowledge of the basic structure of reality is possible and what sources this knowledge could have.<ref>{{multiref | {{harvnb|McDaniel|2020|loc=§ 7.2 The Epistemology of Metaphysics}} | {{harvnb|Van Inwagen|Sullivan|Bernstein|2023|loc=§ 5. Is Metaphysics Possible?}} }}</ref> Knowledge of moral statements, like the claim that lying is wrong, belongs to the [[epistemology of ethics]]. It studies the role of [[Ethical intuitionism|ethical intuitions]], [[Coherentism|coherence]] among moral beliefs, and the problem of moral disagreement.<ref>{{multiref | {{harvnb|DeLapp|loc=Lead section, § 6. Epistemological Issues in Metaethics}} | {{harvnb|Sayre-McCord|2023|loc=§ 5. Moral Epistemology}} }}</ref> The [[ethics of belief]] is a closely related field exploring the intersection of epistemology and [[ethics]]. It examines the norms governing belief formation and asks whether violating them is morally wrong.<ref>{{harvnb|Chignell|2018|loc=Lead section}}</ref> [[Religious epistemology]] studies the role of knowledge and justification for religious doctrines and practices. It evaluates the reliability of evidence from [[religious experience]] and [[Religious text|holy scriptures]] while also asking whether the norms of reason should be applied to religious [[faith]].<ref>{{multiref | {{harvnb|McNabb|2019|pp=1–3, 22–23}} | {{harvnb|Howard-Snyder|McKaughan|2023|pp=[https://books.google.com/books?id=M5LTEAAAQBAJ&pg=PA96 96–97]}} }}</ref>

Epistemologists of language explore the nature of linguistic knowledge. One of their topics is the role of tacit knowledge, for example, when native speakers have mastered the rules of [[grammar]] but are unable to explicitly articulate them.<ref>{{harvnb|Barber|2003|pp=1–3, 10–11, 15}}</ref> Epistemologists of modality examine knowledge about what is possible and necessary.<ref>{{harvnb|Vaidya|Wallner|2021|pp=1909–1910}}</ref> Epistemic problems that arise when two people have diverging opinions on a topic are covered by the epistemology of disagreement.<ref>{{harvnb|Croce|2023|loc=Lead section}}</ref> Epistemologists of ignorance are interested in epistemic faults and gaps in knowledge.<ref>{{harvnb|Maguire|2015|pp=[https://link.springer.com/chapter/10.1007/978-94-017-9309-4_4 33–34]}}</ref>