Talk:Metaepistemology

This article was nominated for deletion. Please review the prior discussions if you are considering re-nomination:

keep, 20 March 2013, see discussion.
keep, 26 April 2007, see discussion.

Philosophy: Metaphysics / Epistemology Low‑importance

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

Low

This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Associated task forces:
/
	Metaphysics
	Epistemology

This article was nominated for merging with Epistemology on 20 July 2007. The result of the discussion was keep as separate articles.

The following references may be useful when improving this article in the future:

Sven, Bernecker; Pritchard, Duncan, eds. (2010). "Part X METAEPISTEMOLOGICAL ISSUES". The Routledge Companion to Epistemology. Routledge Philosophy Companions. Routledge. ISBN 978-0-415-96219-3. Might be useful for improving the Epistemological methodology section.
Grajner, Martin; Schmechtig, Pedro, eds. (2016). Epistemic Reasons, Norms and Goals. De Gruyter. ISBN 978-3-11-049676-5.
McHugh, Conor; Way, Jonathan; Whiting, Daniel, eds. (2018). Normativity: Epistemic and Practical. Oxford University Press. ISBN 978-0-19-875870-9.

Jargon

Unfortunately the reality of the field is that the jargon heavy terminology is required to convey very specific ideas. This is not really something that can be changed without significantly decreasing the content of the article. DMelvinKaphan (talk) 03:18, 14 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]