Analyzing the Epistemological Foundations of Future-Oriented Propositions in Future Studies

Document Type : Original Article

Authors

1 PhD Student of Futures Studies at IKIU

2 Dept. of Political Science, Imam khomeini international university, Qazvin, IRAN

3 Political Science and Islamic Revolution Humanities Faculty, Studies, Shahed University, Tehran, Iran

4 Department of Philosophy, Faculty of Humanities, IKIU(Imam Khomeini International University), Qazvin, Iran

5 Associate Professor of Future Studies, Faculty of Social Sciences, Imam Khomeini International University, Qazvin, Iran

Abstract

Future studies as an emerging field has faced many challenges in the last few decades, the most serious of which is leaving the baselessness situation and being equipped with philosophical foundations in order to transform into a scientific field. In this regard, it is faced with basic questions such as how to do research on the future that has not yet been realized, and whether it is even possible to gain knowledge from future-oriented statements. In response to these questions, the authors of the present article first undertake to identify the areas of research about the future and then analyze the serious epistemological issues facing them. Also, taking these issues into consideration, the possibility of gaining knowledge from future assumptions has been analyzed through the lens of three laws of thought. Finally, the authors have explored into the main theories of truth and justification in relation to the future propositions and have proposed theories that are suitable for creating a justified true belief in the future propositions. The results gained by this article indicate that there is an initial possibility of gaining knowledge from future-oriented beliefs. In this regard, the theory of truthfulness has been analyzed and proposed to verify the truth of these beliefs and the theories of introversion and moderate fundamentalism to justify them.

Keywords

References

  1. آئودی، رابرت (1394)، معرفت‌شناسی، ترجمۀ علی­اکبر احمدی، تهران: سازمان انتشارات پژوهشگاه فرهنگ و اندیشه اسلامی.
  2. ارسطو (1397)، العباره در منطق ارسطو، تحقیق عبدالرحمن بدوی، قم: دار زین العابدین.
  3. بل، وندل (1395)، مبانی آینده‌پژوهی:تاریخچه، اهداف و دانش، ترجمۀ مصطفی تقوی، محسن محقق؛ تهران: مؤسسۀ آموزشی و تحقیقاتی صنایع دفاعی، مرکز آینده‌پژوهی علوم و فناوری‌های دفاعی.
  4. پویمن، لوئیس پی (1387)، معرفت‌شناسی، مقدمه­ای بر نظریه شناخت، ترجمۀ رضا محمدزاده، تهران: انتشارات دانشگاه امام صادق (ع).
  5. گریلینگ، ای. اس؛ استرجن، اسکات؛ مارتین، ام.جی (1394)، معرفت‌شناسی، ترجمۀ امیر مازیار، تهران: مؤسسۀ فرهنگی هنری حکمت.
  6. لموس، نوح (1397)، درآمدی بر نظریۀ معرفت، ترجمۀ مهدی فرجی­پاک، عاطفه حقی، تهران: نشر مرکز.
  7. Aligica, P. D. (2003), Prediction, explanation and the epistemology of future studies. Futures, 35(10), 1027-1040.‏ doi:10.1016/S0016-3287(03)00067-3
  8. Bealer, G., Cummings, R., DePaul, M., Foley, R., Goldman, A., Gopnik, A., ... & Kornblith, H. (1998), Rethinking intuition: The psychology of intuition and its role in philosophical inquiry. Rowman & Littlefield Publishers.
  9. Bell, W., & Olick, J. K. (1989), An epistemology for the futures field: problems and possibilities of prediction. Futures, 21(2), 115-135,‏ doi:10.1016/0016-3287(89)90001-3.
  10. Bradfield, R., Wright, G., Burt, G., Cairns, G., & Heijden, K. V. (2005), The origins and evolution of scenario techniques in long range business planning, Futures, 37(8), 795-812.doi:10.1016/j.futures.2005.01.003
  11. Byerly TR. (2013), Explanationism and justified beliefs about the future, Erkenntnis 78(1):229–243. doi:10.1007/s10670-012-9374-7.
  12. Copi, I. M., Cohen, C., & McMahon, K. (2002), Introduction to logic.‏
  13. Feldman, R., & Conee, E. (2008), Internalism Defended, Conee, E., & Feldman, R. (2004), Evidentialism: Essays in epistemology. Clarendon Press.‏ doi:10.1093/0199253722.003.0004.
  14. Georghiou, L. (Ed.). (2008), The handbook of technology foresight: concepts and practice. Edward Elgar Publishing.
  15. Godet, M. (1991), De l'anticipation à l'action: manuel de prospective et de stratégie.‏
  16. Goldman AI (2009), Internalism, externalism, and the architecture of justification. J Philos 106(6):309–338. doi:10.5840/jphil2009106611
  17. Hines, A. (2006), Strategic foresight: the state of the art. The futurist, 40(5), 18, doi:10.1108/FS-11-2014-0075.
  18. Huemer, M. (2007), Weak Bayesian coherentism. Synthese, 157(3), 337-346, Doi:10.1007/s11229-006-9059-3.
  19. Inayatullah, S. (1990). Deconstructing and reconstructing the future: Predictive, cultural and critical epistemologies, Futures, 22(2), 115-141.‏ doi:10.1016/0016-3287(90)90077-U.
  20. Inayatullah, S. (2010), Epistemological pluralism in futures studies: The CLA–Integral debates. Futures, 42(2), 99-102, doi:10.1016/j.futures.2009.09.001
  21. Kuosa, T. (2016), The evolution of strategic foresight: navigating public policy making, Routledge.‏
  22. Martin, B. R. (1995), Foresight in science and technology, Technology analysis & strategic management, 7(2), 139-168.‏ 2: 139–168, doi:10.1080/09537329508524202
  23. Mautner, T. (1997), The penguin dictionary of philosophy, Penguin (Non-Classics).
  24. Nagel, J., San Juan, V., & Mar, R. A. (2013), Lay denial of knowledge for justified true beliefs. Cognition, 129(3), 652-661.‏ doi:10.1016/j.cognition.2013.02.008
  25. Paya, A. (2018), Critical rationalism as a theoretical framework for futures studies and foresight, Futures, 96, 104-114, doi:10.1016/j.futures.2017.12.005
  26. Sardar, Z. (2010), The Namesake: Futures; futures studies; futurology; futuristic; foresight—What's in a name?. Futures, 42(3), 177-184,‏ doi:10.1016/j.futures.2009.11.001
  27. Scheer, R. (1971), Knowledge of the Future. Mind, 80(318), new series, 212-226.
  28. Slaughter, R. A. (1996), The knowledge base of futures studies as an evolving process. Futures, 28(9), 799-812,‏ doi:10.1016/S0016-3287(96)00043-2.
  29. Slaughter, R. A. (2001), Knowledge creation, futures methodologies and the integral agenda, Foresight-The journal of future studies, strategic thinking and policy, 3(5), 407-418.‏ doi:10.1108/14636680110697129.
  30. Slaughter, R. A. (2002), Beyond the mundane: reconciling breadth and depth in futures enquiry. Futures, 34(6), 493-507, doi:10.1016/S0016-3287(01)00076-3.
  31. Steup, Matthias and Ram Neta, "Epistemology", The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy (Fall 2020 Edition), Edward N. Zalta (ed.), URL = <https://plato.stanford.edu/archives/fall2020/entries/epistemology/>.Stoecker R (2001) Wer weiss, was die Zukunft bringen wird?: prognosen als Erkenntnistheoretische Herausforderung, Concept Z Philos 34(84):1–22.
  32. Tapio, P., &amp; Hietanen, O. (2002), Epistemology and public policy: Using a new typology to analyse the paradigm shift in Finnish transport futures studies, Futures, 34(7), 597-620. Doi:10.1016/S0016-3287(02)00003-4.
  33. Toulmin, S. E. (1963), Foresight and Understanding an Enquiry Into the Aims of Science, Foreword by Jacques Barzun.‏
  34. Van Vught, F. A. (1987). Pitfalls of forecasting: fundamental problems for the methodology of forecasting from the philosophy of science. Futures, 19(2), 184-196.‏ doi:10.1016/0016-3287(87)90050-4
  35. Voros, J. (2003). A generic foresight process framework. Foresight, 5(3), 10–21. doi:10.1108/14636680310698379
  36. Voros, J. (2007). On the philosophical foundations of futures research. Knowing Tomorrow?: How Science Deals with the Future, 69-90.
  37. Voros, J. (2008). Integral Futures: An approach to futures inquiry. Futures, 40(2), 190-201. doi:10.1016/j.futures.2007.11.010
  38. Wagar, W. W. (1993). Embracing change: Futures inquiry as applied history. Futures, 25(4), 449-455. doi:10.1016/0016-3287(93)90006-F
  39. Weissmann A (1956), “Der Satz vom ausgeschlossenen Dritten” in seiner Beziehung zu den Grundlagen der Logik, Kant-Studien 47(1–4): 367–377, doi:10.1515/kant.1956.47.1-4.367
New Intellectual Research
Volume 8, Issue 15 - Serial Number 15
September 2023
Pages 25-50

Files

Share

How to cite

Statistics