Talk:Virtue epistemology

Philosophy: Epistemology / Ethics Unassessed

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Philosophy, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of content related to philosophy on Wikipedia. If you would like to support the project, please visit the project page, where you can get more details on how you can help, and where you can join the general discussion about philosophy content on Wikipedia.PhilosophyWikipedia:WikiProject PhilosophyTemplate:WikiProject PhilosophyPhilosophy articles

???

This article has not yet received a rating on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.

???

This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.

Associated task forces:
/
	Epistemology
	Ethics

This article is currently the subject of an educational assignment.

Comments from James Hooten

The field of virtue epistemology is pushing the boundaries of conventional epistemology. While much of the work to this point has centered on the place of virtues and the epistemic agent in a theory of knowledge, the very notion of epistemology is being pushed beyond this traditional understanding because of the focus on virtue and the agent. I have updated the article on virtue epistemology with a partial, working bibliography on recent studies in the field. Comments, questions, and additions for the article would be most welcome.

As a side note, my master's thesis, which I am in the process of writing, is on St. Thomas Aquinas and Virtue Epistemology. I would be most interested in other work being done in virtue epistemology, especially work that takes the moral theory of other notable figures in philosophy and theology and applying it to contemporary virtue epistemology.

Thanks! -James Hooten

I'm trying to clean up this article a bit in response to the {{context}} tag, so please check it over to make sure I haven't distorted anything in the process. The meaning of the statement that intellectual virtues "can either be conceived of as faculties or as exemplary traits" isn't clear to me from reading the article, so I don't know how to explain it. - AdelaMae ^{(t - c - wpn)} 00:02, 15 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

disambiguation

Moral epistemology is redirecting to here but this would confuse someone whos looking for something similar to meta-ethics. I think there should be a disambiguation sign which would redirect to it. --189.33.208.9 21:28, 24 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I've placed a disambiguation notice at the top of the page, is it what you had in mind? Skomorokh ^incite 22:18, 24 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Major change

I'm about to post a major change to this article. I'm currently heading up a group of senior philosophy majors that have been tasked with fleshing this article out for our final seminar class. I have attempted to retain as much of James' content as possible, and I have retained his bibliography. If there are any problems, do not hesitate to contact me. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Thaumazein (talk • contribs) 01:52, 1 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Yo, thanks for pledging to improve the article. A major pitfall of students and academics trying to help develop Wikipedia articles is that they engage in original research, which is expressly forbidden in the encyclopedia. So please, cite your sources if you add or alter any claims to the article. Please feel free to ask if you have any questions, and thanks again for your commitment. Regards, Skomorokh 02:11, 1 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

No problem. There is no original research, and everything that I can cite, is cited. There's going to be some cleanup work in the next few days, I'm sure.Thaumazein (talk) 03:33, 1 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]