|
|
#1
10-26-2005, 09:26 PM
|
|||
|
|||
Epistemology
Nothing specific, but I was just wondering how you answer the questions- What is Knowledge? and Do We Know Anything? Just looking for a little discussion on how to correctly answer these questions.
|
|
#3
10-26-2005, 09:47 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Epistemology
good intro
Its a huge subject. I'd recommend reading the relevent chunk of Robert Nozick - Philosophical Explanations. Cambridge: Harvard University Press chez
|
|
#4
10-26-2005, 09:47 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Epistemology
I like the simple "knowledge = true, justified belief" definition.
The tricky bit, of course, is defining when a true belief is "justified". Personally, I insist on a causal element in my justifications. That is, I only allow a fact to be used as a justification for knowledge of a statement if the truth of that statement and the fact I am using are causally related in some way.
|
|
#6
10-26-2005, 10:26 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Epistemology
for those who think that justified true belief is knowledge I reccomend Edmund Gettier's essay "Is Knowledge Justified True Belief" it's very short and easy to understand.
|
|
#7
10-26-2005, 10:30 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Epistemology
[ QUOTE ]
for those who think that justified true belief is knowledge I reccomend Edmund Gettier's essay "Is Knowledge Justified True Belief" it's very short and easy to understand. [/ QUOTE ] Gettier problems are in the link above. chez
|
|
#8
10-26-2005, 10:31 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Epistemology
I've read the gettier paper and although it complicates matters, the requirement of a causal relationship between the justification and the statement overcomes the problems he brings up.
Thus I can still call knowledge true, justified belief - I just must have more stringent requirements on the justifications I use.
|
|
#9
10-26-2005, 10:38 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Epistemology
[ QUOTE ]
I've read the gettier paper and although it complicates matters, the requirement of a causal relationship between the justification and the statement overcomes the problems he brings up. Thus I can still call knowledge true, justified belief - I just must have more stringent requirements on the justifications I use. [/ QUOTE ] The main problem I have with TJB is it skips the important bit about knowledge. I want to tell which of my justified beliefs are true i.e. which are knowledge. pointing out that the true ones are true isn't very helpful. chez
|
|
#10
10-26-2005, 10:52 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Epistemology
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ] I've read the gettier paper and although it complicates matters, the requirement of a causal relationship between the justification and the statement overcomes the problems he brings up. Thus I can still call knowledge true, justified belief - I just must have more stringent requirements on the justifications I use. [/ QUOTE ] The main problem I have with TJB is it skips the important bit about knowledge. I want to tell which of my justified beliefs are true i.e. which are knowledge. [/ QUOTE ] That's exactly what JTB is supposed to be doing. S knows P is true iff 1. S believes P 2. P is true 3. S is justified in believing P.
|
 |
|
|
Linear Mode
