Epistemology Flashcards
What is Apriori knowledge?
Knowledge that can be acquired independently of any experience
Argument from illusion?
Against direct realism
Disagrees with DR as we can be subject to illusions, which distort our perception of reality, meaning immediate objects of reality can’t be material objects
P1 When under an illusion, an object can appear to have a different property (Eg a “bent” straw in water)
P2 The perceiver is directly aware of this apparent property
P3 But the object doesn’t have this property in reality
C1 So what we perceive in comparison to the actual reality is different
C2 Which makes direct realism false as we need to make the distinction between what is apparent and what is real
What is the Primary/secondary Quality distinction?
For IR
Idea: Whatsoever the mind percieves in itself, or the immediate object of perception
Quality: The power to product any idea in our mind
Primary qualities (Shape, size, motion, position) are inseparable from an object, meaning however the object is altered, it must still retain some size, or position. Without these qualities, they wouldn’t be essential at all
P1: If you continually divide an object, the parts must retain the primary qualities even when they are to small to be percieved
P2: Therefore primary qualities exist mind independently
Secondary qualities are “powers” that produce a sensation in us, and they alter and vanish. Secondary qualities are dependent on primary qualities and require a mind to appear (eg. a pounded almond visibily changes, alongside its taste and colour, and if we block our senses its becomes null)
What is Berkeleys attack on Primary/secondary Quality distinction?
Attack IR
Berkeley wishes to establish that all properties are mind dependent, and attacks the distinction by trying to prove that primary qualities exist dependently
P1- Secondary qualities are subject to interpersonal perceptual variation (objects can have different tastes, colours) making them MD
P2- primary qualities are also subject to interpesonal PV (objects have different sizes, shapes)
C1- This makes primary qualities mind dependent
What is Innatism? (Including slave boy argument)
The claim that we’re born with knowledge
Plato believed this knowledge to be “printed on our souls at the point of existence”, and we have simply forgotten it
We can recollect this knowledge through a series of questions/reasoning (rationalism)
Slave boy argument (Argument that shows how to access these innate ideas)
P1)The slave has never been taught geometry
P2)Socrates simply asks questions, he doesn’t teach the slave anything
P3)After questioning, the slave manages to correctly answer Socrates’ question
P4)he now has a truth about geometry
C1)the truth didn’t derive from his own experience, so it must’ve been innate
What is no universal assent?
Locke’s attack on Innatism + 25 marker on experience
Attacks the idea of ideas being innate as they are held by the majority as
Children and idiots do not possess these innate principles
P1- Any innate ideas/concepts x would be universally held
P2- Children and idiiots do not have an ideas of x
P3- If an idea is held in the mind then you must be aware of it
C1- So x isn’t universally held
C2- Therefore x isn’t innate, concepts arent innate
What is JTB (tripartite view of knowledge)
For 25 marker: is knowledge JTB? 2015
S only knows P if and only if
S is justified in believing P
P is true
S believes that P
These conditions are jointly sufficient for knowledge
What is the gettier counter example (Lucky true belief)
For 25 marker: is knowledge JTB? 2015
Aims to disprove JTB by challenging the sufficiency of the tripariate definition, by showing how its possible to have JTB but not knowledge
P1)Smith and Jones want the same Job
P2)Smith has evidence of Jones getting the job (He’s told by the president of the company)
P3)He also sees that Jones has 10 coins in his pocket
P4)Smith forms the belief that the man with 10 coins in his pocket gets the job
P5)Smith ends up getting the job, and then finds out he has 10 coins in his pocket also
C1)Therefore JTB isn’t sufficient for knowledge
He didn’t have knowledge despite meeting all the criterias, he was lucky to have had 10 coins in his pocket
What is JTBN?
For 25 marker: is knowledge JTB? 2015
Lemma: premise that is accepted as true in an argument
Aims to strengthen JTB argument by adding an extra condition
P1) I believe Jones has 10 coins (He sees this)
P2) I believe jones will get the job(Is told this)
P3) I believe the person with 10 coins will get the job
P2) is a false lemma, it isn’t true as his belief is false (Jones doesn’t get the job, smith ends up getting it)
What is RTB
For 25 marker: is knowledge JTB? 2015
Aims to improve the JTB by replacing J with R (A reliable cognitive process)
Reliable cognitive process (Believing, reading from trust worthy sources, seeing up close)
P is true
S believes that P
S belief that P is formed by a reliable cognitive process
What is the fake barn county argument?
For 25 marker: is knowledge JTB? 2015
Aims to disprove reliabilism by showing how it incorrectly justifies knowledge
P1)In fake barn county, locals place up facades of barns
P2)Henry doesn’t know this as he drives through and thinks “these are barns”
P3)obviously, not knowledge as the beliefs aren’t true
P4)On one occasion he sees a real barn and thinks the same thing
P5)He’s justified through perception (Also a reliable cognitive process)
P6)it isn’t inferred through a false belief
C1)the belief is true
Shows his belief isn’t knowledge, he’s lucky. RTB would argue that Henry knows theres a barn, even though it was by luck making it false
Aquaintance, Ability and propersitional knowledge
Knowing of (I know of Oxford University)
Knowing how ( I know how to ride a bike)
Knowing that (Eg. I know that elephants are heavier than mice)
What is Berkleys Master argument?
Argues in favour of idealism and aims to show that it is a contradiction to claim we can concieve of mind independent objects as if one concieves of an object, its dependent on their mind
P1- Try to concieve of a tree which exists independently of any mind
P2- In doing so, the tree is being concived by you
C- Therefore the tree is in your mind and isn’t independent of any mind after all
Descartes cogito as an example of apriori intuition
The cogito is Descartes claim that he exists as a thinking thing, that is clear and distinct
P1- I am thinking
P2- All thinking things exist
C- Therefore I exist
Its an apriori intuition as it isn’t known through emprical observation/sense experience, and is a direct awareness of a truth discovered by thinking and reasoning only
What is Indirect realism?
for 12 marker how does it lead to scepticism
Mind independent objects exist in the external world, but we don’t directly percieve them
We perceive the world and physical objects indirectly through sense data(We are directly aware of this, these are appearances)
Indirect realism leading to scepticism
for 12 marker how does it lead to scepticism
P1-If we never directly perceive mind independent objects , our perceptual experiences cant give us evidence of them existing
P2-Our claims would then have to be inferred from claims about our sense data (ideas)
P3-The inference cant be justifed (even through experience or reason) as our senses can decieve us (eg. Brain in a vat, evil decieving demon)
C-Therefore the indirect realist cant know that there is any mind independent reality beyond what’s percieved
Locke’s response to IR lead to scepticism based on involuntary nature of existence
for 12 marker how does it lead to scepticism
Inductive argument
Locke argues that we aren’t in control of our sense data, and our sensations must be caused by something external
Eg. if he opens his eyes he will recieve sense data, not by choice
Having involuntary experiences suggest that they are caused by mind independent physical objects, since ideas are mind dependent and stem from our own imagination
What is Solipsism?
The belief that only my mind exists (no other minds exist, nor are there any mind independent objects/properties)
The only thing that is real mind/mental states, I alone exist as a thinking thing
its not possible for me to know the existence of anything apart from my mind/mental states
Existence of external world is the “best hypothesis” (Russell)
Against IR
A hypothesis that acknowledges that although we cannot prove for certain that external objects exist which cause our experiences, the existence of an external world is preferrable because
Its simpler, and accounts better for differences in percieved properties between multiple experiences (eg, a cat in one location, then in another, hungry and then not hungry) the best explanation of these experiences is caused by a mind independent cat that changes whilst unobserved
Our belief in an external world is instinctive, and shouldn’t be dropped unless a better alternative is available
Since it doesn’t lead to any difficulties, and simplifies our account for experiences, there isn’t a good reason for dropping it
What is Direct realism?
For 12 marker 2017
Direct realism is the belief that we immediately perceive mind independent physical objects, and our senses detect the properties of these objects
The objects retain these properties when unperceived
(eg. Leaving an apple in a drawer, it still retains its properties when forgotten about)
What is the Hallucination argument?
For 12 marker 2017
Hallucinations happen when humans perceive something mind-dependent (which doesn’t exist outside of their own mind)
P1 Hallucinations can be selectively indistinguishable from veridical perceptions (Truthful accurate representation)
P2 If they are subjectively indistinguishable, then they must be aware of the same thing in both cases
C1 This means that during veridical perception what we directly perceive is sense data
C2 meaning we perceive the world indirectly making direct realism false
What does Descarte mean by clear and distinct ideas?
An idea is clear if the content/truth of propersition is immediately accessible, indubitable, known with certainty, self evident/justified
An idea is distinct if one can distinguish the concept/propersition from others, and it cant be confused with other ones
These are apriori (known through thought/reason alone
Explain why there might be a problem with the role played by God in Idealism
Idealism: Immediate objects of perception are mind independent objects
Role of God in Idealism: Argued that God is the cause of our sensory ideas, Gods mind contains ideas when they aren’t percieved by us, God maintains the laws of nature, God is an ontological guarantor (Garuntees existence of objects which exist independent of our minds)
The problem: If God percives all and is the source of our sense experience, this means he is subject to sensations and cannot be perfect
P1- Berkley claims what we percieve is in the mind of God
C1- This follows from the idea that pain is in the mind of God, so God suffers pain
P2- If God suffers pain, he’s imperfect
P3-God is defined as a perfect being
C2- Therefore Berkleys views lead to a contradiction
Explain view that belief isn’t a necessary condition for knowledge
Radford example aims to prove belief isn’t necessary by equating knowledge with sucessful action rather than belief
P1: Imagine a person learns some information and forgets it
P2: They do a quiz and get a large amount correct even though they were guessing
C1- We could conclude that the person knows the answers even though they don’t believe anything that they said to be true
