Ecology studies the dynamic interdependence of living systems. Ecological epistemology does the same, focusing on the living systems that generate knowl edge. Epistemology, of course, should be ecological, since knowledge is almost always generated in the living systems comprising shared forms of life and we cannot sensibly study such systems apart from their dynamic interdependence. In short, I accept Lorraine Code's premise that knowledge is embodied in inter dependent living systems and the obvious inference that epistemology should be ecological. The alternative view that we can understand how we know what we know by reasoning a priori faces insuperable problems, as W. V. Quine among others has made abundantly clear, and fails to explain our ordinary experience of coming to know something. So, let me say at the outset that I fully endorse her new and arresting vision of epistemology. Epistemic ecology is a rich and evocative metaphor that Code uses subtly and creatively to alter our thinking about knowledge. From her perspective, and now mine as well, there are no limits on how ecological epistemology can and should be. Unless we can be much more specific, however, this splendid metaphor may not have the transforming effect it should have. Let us then be more specific. Here are five central ways in which epistemology, in her vision of it, is ecologi cal: (1) Our best knowledge of living systems is not reductive in the sense of knowledge arising purely from knowing their parts. Living systems cannot be fully known independent of their natural environment, and the same for those living systems that generate knowledge. (2) Living systems cannot be fully understood by applying universal laws of nature, as required by the nomological deductive model of scientific knowledge, thereby ignoring the ways in which the living systems may display patterns of behavior unique to their environ ment. The same can be said at the epistemic level for systems that generate knowledge. (3) The primary sites of knowledge generation are not individual