Which Natural Epistemology?

In modern American language philosophy, there are two methodologies in naturalism. One is empiricism represented by Quine, the other is rationalism represented by Chomsky. The two sides focus on the theory of language. The article discusses feasibility of Quine's Naturalized Epistemology through Chomsky's criticism on Quine's dualism of epistemology, language philosophy-indeterminacy of translation and language acquisition theory.First, Quine puts forward a new epistemology which is in order to coordinate the relation between science and empiricism. Quine's epistemology is unfolded by his scientific theory of language, which build up a relation between world and language. However, his theory background——Holism seems to be ambiguous because of its moderation. Thus, Quine's epistemology has dual inclination. Chomsky's language philosophy is based on rationalism which states scientific theory should rely on human's abstract thinking, not on empirical things. Chomsky criticizes dreadful influences that Quine's dualism brought by. The dualism of methodology obstructs development of science. Empirical facts interrupt theory construction in science.Secondly, Chomsky criticizes indeterminacy of translation in three ways. On the filed of scientific value, Chomsky doubts exist of indeterminacy of translation. From Quine's point of view, scientific theory should be constructed by empirical stimulation. But, to Chomsky, scientific theory is constructed by reason. There's nothing to do with outside empirical stimulation. On the field of language acquisition, Chomsky argues the relation between indeterminacy of translation and language acquisition. Children's mission is different from linguists'. Quine's indeterminacy of translation imposes on language acquisition only because of his empirical background. On the field of specific language theory, Chomsky criticizes essential of indeterminacy of language.Last, Chomsky criticizes the "non-empirical" part of Quine's language theory. Quine agrees the studies of insane language acquisition, but he insists necessity of empirical part. However, Chomsky doubts Quine's empirical study:the theory of innate language acquisition do not need empirical facts.Finally, we can conclude that Quine's naturalized epistemology is unfeasible. However, Chomsky's rational method is in conformity with the scientific aim.