Since the concepts of epistemology and gnoseology are focused on the study of knowledge, it is frequent that both terms are confused and used as synonyms.

However, the nuances offered by each one are important, and that is why here we are going to see the differences between epistemology and gnoseology , as well as going into more detail with the definitions of both terms.

Differences between epistemology and gnoseology

Before going into more detail about each of the differences between these two terms, it is necessary to talk in greater depth about what the word epistemology means and what the word gnoseology means.

Epistemology: what it is and what are its origins

Epistemology, from the Greek ‘episteme’, ‘knowledge’ ” and ‘logos’, ‘study’, is a branch of philosophy that deals with the philosophical problems that surround the theory of knowledge, fundamentally scientific knowledge. That is to say, epistemology is in charge of defining knowledge and related concepts, sources, criteria and types of possible knowledge, as well as the degree to which each of them turns out to be true. This discipline understands knowledge as a relationship between the person and the object of study.

The origins of this discipline can be found in Ancient Greece by the hand of philosophers as important for the history of Western thought as Aristotle, Parmenides and Plato. Although its origins are very old, epistemology did not develop as a science until the 15th and 16th centuries, when the Renaissance took place.

Each philosopher sees in a different way the relationship in which people relate to the knowledge we want to acquire. For Plato, true knowledge, which is related to scientific knowledge, was that which was achieved through reason . He considered that this was the only way to know the true essence of things, the ideas that shaped them.

The objects of the sensible world, which arose from ideas, could only provide humans with an opinion or doxa, but never true knowledge, since physical objects can change and therefore we cannot perceive them beyond an appearance.

The physical world, seen in Plato’s eyes, was no more than a copy of the world of ideas, a metaphysical world in which, if you got there, you could have a real knowledge of the essence of things. The body, which is material, belongs to the physical world, while the soul, which has been trapped in the body, belongs to the world of ideas, and when we die it will return to the world from which it came. This is what is known as Platonic Realism.

However, his disciple, Aristotle, true knowledge is not found in a distant world that we can only reach after we are dead. For this philosopher, knowledge is born directly from sensitive experience, through what our senses capture. It is through experience that we are able to capture the essence of things . This, which differs radically from Plato’s thought, is called empiricism.

With these examples, and without exposing all the Western philosophy that has been and will be given, the idea behind the word ‘epistemology’ becomes understandable. The discipline that tries to find out how the human being obtains knowledge of the world in which he lives, either through the physical world or through enlightenment coming from a non-perceptible world.

Gnoseology: what exactly is it?

Gnoseology, from ‘gnosis’, ‘knowledge, faculty of knowledge’ and ‘logos’, ‘study’, is the discipline that studies the nature, origin and limits of knowledge, not the knowledge itself. That is, this discipline does not study what physics, mathematics or biology is, but knowledge in general and what its limits and foundations are. Therefore, it can be understood as a theory of knowledge, in general terms, without it being necessarily scientific.

This discipline also has its roots in Ancient Greece and, in fact, it is considered that the emergence of the first currents of Western philosophy were born along with this concept. Most of the philosophers have contributed to the development of this branch of philosophy , being found in works such as De Anima by Aristotle or in his book IV on metaphysics.

Going back to the 17th century, empiricists such as John Locke, David Hume and George Berkeley defend the role of experience when it comes to knowledge, arguing that any kind of knowledge comes from sensitive experience, from the data of the senses. The growth of the individual, whatever he or she knows, occurs through experience and his or her first interactions while still an infant turn out to be the source of all knowledge , in which the others that he or she acquires will settle.

Rene Descartes, on the other hand, considers that clear and evident knowledge can be obtained through doubt, that is, through reasoning. By thinking about the reality around us, we can connect the dots and, at the same time, be closer to true knowledge. This philosopher, together with Spinoza and Leibniz, affirmed that reality was independent of experience and that there were innate ideas in the human mind, that we were not a tabula rasa.

As a combination of both visions, Immanuel Kant proposes in his Critique of Pure Reason his concept of transcendental idealism. In it he affirms that the subject is not passive in the act of knowing, but active, knowing the world and building his own reality . The limit of knowledge is experience. However, it is only possible to have a phenomenal knowledge of reality, that is, of the way in which the object is presented to the subject and he perceives it. The thing itself, its real essence, is not within our reach.

How do you distinguish between the two?

Once we have seen the definitions of epistemology and gnoseology and what their origins are, both historical and etymological, it becomes evident why they are so easily confused. They are, in essence, the study of knowledge and, on top of that, these words have an etymological origin that, basically, starts from the same idea: ‘gnose’ and ‘episteme’ mean knowledge, so they can be translated as “the study of knowledge”.

However, they do differ. Very subtly, but they do. Although the vast majority of philosophers who have addressed epistemology in their philosophy have also addressed gnoseology, some of them using the two terms indistinctly, the two concepts are different.

The main distinction between epistemology and gnoseology, although it may seem somewhat arbitrary, is the type of knowledge they address . On the one hand, epistemology is dedicated to more ethological or psychological knowledge, more oriented towards the idea of intelligence and directly related to the sciences, whatever they may be.

Epistemology refers to knowledge as that which occurs between a subject with the capacity to learn and think and the object of study. On the other hand, Gnoseology deals with the theory of knowledge in general, whatever this knowledge may be, from something as simple as the daily experience of every day to something a little more complex.

Spinning a bit finer and going back to the issue of etymological origin, it can be said that there is a significant difference in the origin of both words , but it is so subtle that it tends to be misleading. Episteme’ refers more to a system of knowledge, that is, what is understood in modern terms as a discipline or science. Gnosis’, on the other hand, refers more to individual knowledge, what a person has learned throughout his life, regardless of whether it is something complex or not.

Bibliographic references:

  • Bunge, M. (1989). Science: its method and philosophy. Siglo Veinte Editions: Buenos Aires. Pp. 9 – 34.
  • Rodríguez, B. (2006). Legal methodology. Chapter II. Theory of knowledge and understanding of law. Pp. 50 – 65.