Does historical epistemology imply historical ontology?

Abstract

The article problematizes the relationship between historical epistemology, which is now recognized as a new wave of epistemological studies, and ontology. Does historical epistemology imply any kind of ontology? Could historical meta-epistemology refer to historical ontology? What is the subject matter of historical ontology? Can this proposed historical ontology be suggested by natural science? If historical epistemology is still a project, then all these questions become even more vital. It is known that the Kantian transcendental justification of science was unhistorical. The transcendental method was based on the examples of a priori knowledge, derived from classical mechanics, which served as an expression of absolute and timeless objectivity. However, the scientific revolution of the end of the 19th — beginning of the 20th centuries initiated such epistemological problems that could not be satisfactorily resolved in terms of the Kantian transcendental philosophy. It turned out that the a priori principles underlying the transcendental method can be revised in the history of science. This discovery has resulted in historicization of epistemology which now deals with unstable and historically changeable knowledge. It is argued that the most important problem for historical epistemology is the problem of transition from one system of knowledge and their constitutive principles to another, a gap between them instead of their consistency. But is it possible to find an ontological analog of this transition? The thesis is defended that historical epistemologists if they want to hold a traditional connection to natural sciences, should clarify their attitude toward historical ontology by clarifying the scientific character of the latter.