defining knowledge

Question 1

what is the tripartite definition of knowledge?

Answer 1

Justified, True, Belief

Question 2

what are the three types of knowledge?

Answer 2

ability (I know how)

acquaintance (I know of)

propositional (i know that)

Question 3

what are necessary conditions?

Answer 3

conditions that are required for something to fit a definition

—> ‘unmarried’ is a necessary condition for batchelor

Question 4

what are sufficient conditions?

Answer 4

set of conditions that fully cover every requirement of a definition

—> unmarried man are sufficient conditions for bachelor

Question 5

what are Gettier cases?

Answer 5

problems demonstrating that JTB isn’t a suitable definition of knowledge, they aren’t sufficient conditions

Question 6

describe Gettier case 1

Answer 6

1. Smith and Jones interview for job
2. Smith hears interview say “I’m gonna give Jones the job”
3. Smith knows Jones has 10 coins in his pocket
4. Smith forms the Justified True Belief that “the man who will get the job has 10 coins in his pocket”
5. But Smith gets job, not Jones
6. Smith realises he coincidentally has 10 coins in his pocket too

its JTB, but isn’t knowledge because it was just lucky

Question 7

describe Gettier Case 2

Answer 7

1. Smith has a Justified Belief that “Jones owns a Ford”
2. Smith doesn’t know where Brown is, he has the Justified Belief that “Either Jones owns a Ford or Brown is in Barcelona”
3. By coincidence, Jones doesn’t own a Ford
4. By coincidence, Brown is in Barcelona
5. Smith’s belief is true but not the way he thought it was

Question 8

name four alternative definitions of knowledge

Answer 8

No False Lemmas

Reliabilism

Virtue Epistemology

Infallibilism

Question 9

what is the No False Lemmas definition of knowledge?

Answer 9

knowledge =

Justified

True

Belief

thats based on no false lemmas (beliefs)

Question 10

name 3 strengths of No False Lemmas

Answer 10

— strengthens justification, preventing falsity

— deals with original Gettier cases

— allows past examples of “knowledge” that have been disproven to no longer count as knowledge

Question 11

name 2 weaknesses of No False Lemmas

Answer 11

— doesn’t deal with modern Gettier cases (Ginet’s red barn)

— we might not realise that current knowledge is based on a false lemma: it leads to scepticism?

Question 12

what is the Reliabilist definition of knowledge?

Answer 12

a true belief caused by a RELIABLE METHOD (‘justified’ is too vague and subjective)

Reliable
True
Belief

a reliable method is something that produces a high percentage of true beliefs

Question 13

give 3 strengths of the reliabilist definition of knowledge

Answer 13

— potentially better and more specific than justification

— allows children and animals to have knowledge without justification

— Nozick gets around Gettier cases

Question 14

give 3 weaknesses of reliabilist definition of knowledge

Answer 14

— original version (before Nozick) fails to deal with Gettier cases

— potentially just as vague as justification

— ‘reliable’ still leaves room for error: most processes COULD be wrong in some cases

Question 15

Nozick’s reliabilist solution to Gettier problems

Answer 15

a process is reliable if the belief formed from it being wrong changes your mind

Question 16

Virtue Epistemology definition of knowledge

Answer 16

Virtuous (epistemic)
True
Belief

—> you must arrive at the true belief using epistemic virtue

Question 17

what is epistemic virtue according to Sosa?

Answer 17

AAA

Adroitness (skill)
Accuracy (correctness)
Aptness (arriving at the accurate belief as a result of adroitness)

Question 18

how does Sosa solve Ginet’s Fake Red Barn cases?

Answer 18

2 types of knowledge:
ANIMAL (lesser standard of adroitness and intellect)
REFLECTIVE (higher standard of adroitness and intellect, humans achieving greater udnerstanding of aptness)

—> knowledge of red barns is ANIMAL KNOWLEDGE

Question 19

give 3 strengths of virtue epistemology

Answer 19

— bridges the gap between justification + knowledge

— gets around Gettier cases

— recognises that humans can have a higher standard of knowledge

Question 20

give 2 weaknesses of virtue epistemology

Answer 20

— maybe struggles with red barns?

— reliabilism says it doesn’t have necessary justification for knowledge (epistemic virtue doesn’t guarantee truth)

Question 21

what is the infallibilist definition of knowledge?

Answer 21

based from Descartes’ sceptical approach

Infallibly 100% justified (no room for doubt)
True
Belief

Impossible to rationally doubt

Question 22

give 3 strengths of infallibilism

Answer 22

— solves Gettier cases

— clearly defines ‘justification”

— aligns with our view that we have to be certain of something to know it

Question 23

give 3 weaknesses of the infallibilism definition of knowledge

Answer 23

— rejects too much, leading to v high level of scepticism

— tells us what knowledge ideally SHOULD be, not how we actually currently use the term

— goes against our intuition of what we do know

Question 24

what is the nature of definition according to Zagzebski?

Answer 24

???

Question 25

What is Ginet’s Fake Red Barn Gettier case?

Answer 25

— there is a county full of fake barns that look identical to real barns

— Henry unknowingly drives through the county

— Henry often thinks “there’s a barn” when he looks at the fake barns: NOT KNOWLEDGE, BC ITS NOT TRUE

— BUT on once occasion Henry coincidentally looks at a REAL barn and thinks “there’s a barn”: it is a justified, true belief based on no false lemmas

Question 26

defining knowledge essay

Answer 26

1. tripartite definition + Gettier cases + Ginet
2. infallibilism
   yes solves gettier cases: integrate
   BUT: leads to scepticism, what knowledge SHOULD be and not how it’s used currently. not pragmatic enough
3. reliabilism
   yes solves gettier, integrate.
   yes solves issues with infall + scepticism, integrate.
   BUT: fails with Ginet red barns, potentially as vague as justification, leaves room for error
   Nozick reworks reliabilism to solve this! So reliabilist best as it lowers threshold of knowledge enough to be a practical, pragmatic definition of knowledge that allows us to know things without scepticism getting in the way