What is knowledge

Define acquaintance knowledge

Knowledge 'of' something; personal familiarity with someone or something. (e.g., "I know of my mother.")

Define ability knowledge

Knowledge 'how' to do something; a skill or practical know-how. (e.g., "I know how to swim.")

Define propositional knowledge

Knowledge 'that' something is the case; factual knowledge of a proposition. (e.g., "I know that a triangle has three sides.")

Explain how Zagzebski analyses propositional knowledge

1. Knowledge is 'cognitive contact with reality.' 2. Analyzed via necessary & sufficient conditions. 3. Must be practical and define the 'essence' of knowledge. 4. Involves a relationship between knower and object. 5. Knowledge is valued as it connects the knower to the world.

Define the tripartite definition of knowledge

S knows that P if and only if: 1. S believes that P. 2. P is true. 3. S has justification for P. These three conditions are individually necessary and jointly sufficient for knowledge.

Explain why belief might not be necessary for knowledge

Radford argues that a person can have knowledge without belief. Example: A student correctly answers a test question but feels they are guessing, having forgotten they learned the fact. They recall the true answer, suggesting knowledge without conscious belief.

Explain why truth might not be necessary for knowledge

Historical examples (e.g., flat Earth) show people held justified beliefs later proven false. Kuhn's paradigm shifts suggest what is considered 'knowledge' can be false but is still treated as knowledge within its time, challenging truth as a necessary condition.

Explain why justification can be flawed

One can have a true belief based on a false or irrelevant justification (epistemic luck). Example: Believing France will win the World Cup because your cat chased a French mouse, and then France wins. The true belief lacks a proper justification.

Explain why the tripartite conditions are not jointly sufficient

Gettier cases demonstrate justified true belief without knowledge. Example: Smith believes (justified) that Jones will get the job and has 10 coins. Smith gets the job and also has 10 coins. Smith has a justified true belief, but it's based on a false assumption (luck), not knowledge.

Define infallibilism

Strengthens the justification condition to require certainty. S knows P iff: 1. S believes P. 2. P is true. 3. S has justification for P that guarantees its truth (makes it certain). Aims to eliminate epistemic luck.

Define the "no false lemmas" definition

Adds a condition that knowledge cannot be inferred from a false premise. S knows P iff: 1. S believes P. 2. P is true. 3. S has justification for P. 4. P is not inferred from any false belief (lemma). Addresses Gettier cases.

Define reliabilism

Replaces justification with a reliability condition. S knows P iff: 1. S believes P. 2. P is true. 3. S's belief was produced by a reliable cognitive process (e.g., perception, memory). Aims to rule out luck by focusing on the process's reliability.

Define virtue epistemology

Replaces justification with an intellectual virtue condition. S knows P iff: 1. S believes P. 2. P is true. 3. S's belief was acquired through intellectual virtues (e.g., critical thinking, attentiveness). Knowledge is "cognitive contact with reality" from virtuous intellectual activity.

What is the False Barn County critique of NFL + reliabilism

Anne drives through false barn county, which is populated by many false barns

She happens to point out a barn to her child in the passenger seat

This barn happesn to be the only real one in the county

She knows of hte barn through a reliable cognitive process/there were no false lemmas in her coming to know the barn

but this is still an example of epistemic luck