EPISTEMOLOGY

Question 1

what is propositional knowledge

Answer 1

knowing that

Question 2

what is acquaintance knowledge

Answer 2

knowing of

Question 3

what is practical/ability knowledge

Answer 3

knowing how

Question 4

what is a proposition

Answer 4

a declarative statement.

Question 5

what are pitfalls to avoid when defining

Answer 5

circularity
obscure
negative
adhoc

Question 6

How does plato define knowledge in the meno and theaetetus

Answer 6

-compares the stability of knowledge with the flightiness of belief.
-our true belief is backed up with reason
-this makes our true belief “stick in the mind”i
-in the theaetetus , true belief accompanied by rational account is knowledge, or justified true belief.

Question 7

we have justified true belief if,

Answer 7

you believe in P
your belief in P is justified
P is true

if all three conditions are satisfied then the agent must have propositional knowledge. All are necessary and sufficient conditions to know that p.

Question 8

what does the tripartite view try to do

Answer 8

provide a complete analysis of the concept of propositional knowledge.

Question 9

ISSUES WITH JTB- certainty

Answer 9

a difference between knowledge and belief is certainty.
knowledge must be certain

Question 10

ISSUES WITH JTB- Are all the conditions individually necessary?- BELIEF

Answer 10

• one may know how to correctly answer a question in a philosophy paper (having being taught it, but do not remember being taught), therefore we can argue that the agent knew how to answer, without the condition of belief being satisfied.

Question 11

what is the difference between coherence and correspondence of truth

Answer 11

the correspondence of truth says that the claim matches the fact, (the world is flat does not correspond with the fact that it is spherical).

the coherence of truth, a belief is true if it is held together by a web of beliefs supporting each other within a society. (the world is flat). The humans had justified true belief and knew that the world was flat.
both theories require knowledge to be true

Question 12

outline the 10 coins case

Answer 12

i shall argue that (a- if and only if) is false conditions stated are not sufficient for propositional knowledge.

smith and jones apply for the same role at a job offer
suppose that smith has strong evidence for the following conjunctive proposition:

(d) Johnes is the man who will get the job and he has 10 coins in his pocket.

smiths justification for (d) is that johnes would receive the job offer as the head of the company assured him so. And that smith had counted 10 coins in johnes pocket. Proposition d entails;

(e) The man who will get the job has 10 coins.

smith sees the entailment from d to e and accepts e on the grounds of d, for which he has strong evidence. Smith is clearly and coherently justified in believing e is true.

we then imagine the smith gets the job instead of johnes, and unknown to smith, he has 10 coins in his pocket. Proposition e is then true, however the inference from d is false. e is true, smith believes e and is justified in doing so, he has satisfied all conditions, however we are reluctant to say that he has propositional knowledge.

Question 13

Explain what knowledge is according to reliabilism

Answer 13

Knowledge according to reliabilists is:

s knows that p iff and only iff
(1) p is true
(2) s believes that p
(3) p was produced through a reliable cognitive process

these are individually necessary and jointly sufficient conditions for propositional knowledge. Knowledge is JTB produced by a reliable method. Reliable cognitive processes tend to cause true beliefs.

Question 14

what do gettier cases challenge

Answer 14

the sufficiency of the tripartite condition for defining propositional knowledge usually through examples of luck and coincidental situation.

Question 15

define no false lemmas

Answer 15

JTB+N
the justification for your belief is not inferred by any falsehoods

Question 16

what is an advantage of replacing Justification with Reliably formed belief

Answer 16

reliabilism can give an account of how animals can have knowledge. Using JTB account of knowledge, it is unlikely animals will have knowledge as they cannot justify their beliefs.

Question 17

how can one have knowledge without belief?

Answer 17

some equate knowledge with a successful action, for example.
a student may hesitantly get the answer correct on a quiz question, having been taught correctly and cannot remember being taught. in this case one would argue that the student knew the answer, even though he did not really believe it.
plato claimed knowledge and belief are two distinct mental states, knowledge being infallible and belief being fallible, therefore they are two fundamentally different apprehensions of the world.

Question 18

how can one have knowledge without truth- coherence of truth?

Answer 18

knowledge claims that fact is necessary. this depends on how we define truth.
the coherence of truth. knowledge is not a collection of individual true beliefs, however a system of beliefs that cohere with one another. if a belief spheres with other beliefs in a system, it may be considered part of a coherent set of beliefs, even if it is not actually true. in this sense a belief can be justified and believed, but not necessarily true.

Question 19

what is correspondence of truth?

Answer 19

truth has to correspond to facts

Question 20

how can one have knowledge without justification?

Answer 20

reliabilism suggests that justification isn’t necessary for knowledge. instead knowledge is a reliably formed true belief. a conscious justification is not needed.
example. John has a rare gift, he knows exact what day of the week it will be according to any date in the future, he is incredibly accurate however is unable to say how he does it.

Question 21

explain zagzebskis double-luck explanation
patient and virus x case

Answer 21

zagzebski argues that the JTB account of knowledge will always leave a gap between the justification and the truth, which leave space for the gettier style cases that rely on double luck. this is when the justification is unluckily wrong and the belief is luckily true.
she gives the example of a doctor who believes a patient has virus x, justifying this. belief with many tests (inductive evidence).
However the symptoms are caused by an unknown virus, y, (unlucky with her other prior justification)
it turns out that the patient does have virus x too, but has it in the early stages where it does not show up in tests. (her belief was luckily true)

Question 22

what is infallibilism

Answer 22

the truth of a proposition is guaranteed in the justification. the claim of knowledge can only be allowed if the belief is infallible. infallibilism claims that we should only have knowledge of things we cannot rationally doubt.

Question 23

explain how infallibilism overcomes the gettier cases

Answer 23

infallibilism claims that we can only have knowledge of things that we cannot rationally doubt, therefore the truth of the belief is guaranteed in the justification.

Gettier style cases take the formed double luck, where one’s’ belief is luckily true, formed from a false justification, where all conditions of the JTB are satisfied, meaning by definition the subject has knowledge when in reality they clearly do not.
according to infallibilism, it is not possible to have a knowledge claim when the justification does not ensure the truth of the belief, therefore gettier cases do not prove the subjects have knowledge.

Question 24

what is a critique of infallibilism

Answer 24

infallibilism goes against our intuition that we can know a lot of things, as this implies that we know very little. what we see as knowledge, such as our claims of history, art and the world would merely be classed as beliefs. this is a very radical definition of our ordinary view of what counts as knowledge.