3 markers EPISTEMOLOGY

How does Linda Zagzebski define propositional knowledge

Linda Zagzebski defines propositional knowledge as being in "cognitive contact with reality". She says knowledge arises out of acts of epistemic virtue.

What does Linda Zagzebski say a good definition should avoid

Zagzebski says that a good definition should not be circular, ad hoc, more obscure than the term being defined, or negative.

What is prepositional knowledge

Propositional knowledge is knowing that some fact is true or false

What is ability knowledge

Ability knowledge is knowing how to perform an action

What is acquaintance knowledge?

Acquaintance knowledge is knowing of something by experience of it

What is the difference between a necessary and contingent truth

A necessary truth is true in all logically possible worlds, its denial of it implies a logical contradiction, whereas a contingent truth's opposite is possible and its denial does not imply a contradiction

What is the difference between a priori and a posteriori knowledge

A priori knowledge is acquired and/or justified through reasoning, whereas a posteriori knowledge is acquired and/or justified via experience

What is the difference between an analytic and a synthetic statement

An analytic statement is true by definition, a synthetic statement cannot be judged to be true just by looking at the definition, but by virtue of how the world is

What is the distinction between necessary and sufficient conditions

To say X is a necessary condition of Y is to say we cannot have Y without X. To say X is a sufficient condition of Y is to say that if we have X, we also have Y.

What does it mean to say a belief is "reliably formed."

A belief is reliably formed if it is acquired via a process which produces a high proportion of true beliefs

What is a 'false lemma'

A lemma is an assumed premise or claim which influences the development of an argument. In 'Gettier-Style problems' the justification for the true belief involves an inference from a premise/claim (a 'lemma') that is false.

What is knowledge according to epistemic virtue

According to accounts based on epistemic virtue, S knows that P if (if and only if):

1. P is true

2. S believes that P

3. S's belief that P is a result of S successfully exercising his/her intellectual virtues.

According to Sosa successfully exercising intellectual virtues entails having an apt belief, which means it is accurate because it is adroit. Zagzebski claims it involves successfully forming a true belief because one was rightly motivated and is acting as a person with virtue would.

What is infallibilism

Infallibilism is the definition that knowledge must be certain, and impossible to have any doubt regarding it, for it to be considered knowledge

What is reliabilism

The theory that you know that p if p is true, you believe that p, and your belief is caused by a reliable cognitive process.

What is the tripartite view of propositional knowledge

You can claim to know something if and only if: it is a belief, it is true, and there is justification for it being true

What is the difference between direct and indirect realism

The direct realist believes we percieve the external world immediately, and therefore the properties of the objects we percieve are mind-independent. Whereas the indirect realist thinks our perception of the external world is mediated through something like sense data or secondary qualities, these are mind-dependent.

What is the difference between direct realism and berkeleys idealism

The direct realist believes we perceive the external world immediately, and therefore the properties of the object we perceive are mind-independent. Whereas the idealist thinks that all that exists are minds and ideas, so the direct objects of perception are mind-dependent.

What is the difference between indirect realism and Berkley's idealism

The indirect realist thinks that our mind-dependent perceptions represent and resemble the mind independent external world. Whereas the idealist thinks that all that exists are minds and ideas, so the objects of our perceptions do not represent anything mind-independent.

What is direct realism

Direct realism is a theory of perception that makes two key claims: (a) an external world of mind-independent objects and properties exists and (b) we perceive it immediately (ie without mediation such as 'sense data')

What are 'sense-data?'

sense data constitute what we, as perceiving subjects, are directly aware of in perceptual experience.

What is the difference between a primary and a secondary quality

A primary quality is objective, measurable, and 'contained' within the object itself. These include mass, weight, quantity, etc. A secondary quality (also known as sense data) is subjective and dependent upon a mind and its perception. These include colour, texture, taste, etc.

What is indirect realism

Indirect realism is the claim that mind-independent physical objects exist in the external world, but we perceive them via some kind of mediation, sense data or secondary qualities, which represent and resemble the external world.

What does Berkeley claim is a contradiction in his master argument?

Berkeley claims it is a contradiction to claim one can concieve of an object which exists outside of any mind, this is because as soon as one conceives of such an object, it is within one's mind.

What is Berkley's idealism?

"The immediate objects of perception (e.g ordinary objects such as tables, chairs, etc) are mind-dependent objects". Berkeley is an immaterialist: he denies the existence of material substance (all that exists are minds and ideas).

What is solipsism?

The claim/belief that only my mind exists (there are no other minds, nor are there any mindindependent objects or properties)

What does an innatist about propositional knowledge believe?

An innatist holds to the position that we are born with some innate propositional knowledge which is therefore not given to us or justified by empirical experience.

What does tabula rasa mean?

"blank slate" it is the empiricist view that the mind has no concepts/knowledge at birth and experience is required to acquire ideas.

What is the distinction between a rationalist and an empiricist

A rationalist believes that reason is the source of knowledge while an empiricist believes that knowledge is gained via experience

What is the distinction between an impression and an idea?

Impressions are the result of direct experience (both internal and external). Ideas are copies of impressions (e.g a memory or a thought of something experienced), and are less forceful and vivid than impressions.

What is the distinction between simple and complex ideas?

A simple idea is a copy of an impression, whereas a complex idea is made up of other ideas and/or impressions. For example, the complex idea of a unicorn is made up of the simpler ideas of horse, horn etc

What are the two prongs of Hume's fork?

Hume's fork is a way of categorising knowledge. Knowledge is either a 'relation of ideas', which are a priori, necessary and analytic; or a 'matter of fact', which are a posteriori, synthetic and contingent

What does Descartes mean by clear and distinct ideas?

An idea is (a) clear and (b) distinct if (a) the truth of it is immediately accessible, it is indubitable and (b) one cannot confuse it with other propositions. They are known a priori.

What is Descartes' cogito

Descartes' cogito is his a priori intuition that he exists as a thinking thing: cogito ergo sum, I think therefore I am.

What is the distinction between intuition and deduction

An intuition is a truth that is grasped immediately, without further inference (clearly and distinctly). A deduction is a conclusion that cannot be doubted as it is reached following a valid argument with true premises.

What are Descartes three waves of doubt?

Descartes' three waves of doubt are sceptical worries that 1) any given experience could be an illusion, 2) at any given time he could be dreaming and 3) that an evil demon could be decieving him about all his knowledge.

What is philosophical scepticism

Philosophical scepticism is the position that one or more of our usual methods of justification for claiming that our beliefs amount to knowledge are inadequate, so we do not in fact have knowledge

What is the difference between Philosophical scepticism and normal incredulity?

Philosophical scepticism is a theoretical worry about the foundations of our knowledge which cannot be alleviated with evidence, ordinary doubt is a practical worry which can be alleviated with evidence.

What is the distinction between global and local scepticism

Local scepticism is where justification for a particular belief or class of beliefs is called into question (eg. The existence of God, or moral facts), whereas global scepticism is the claim that we cannot know anything as none of our beliefs have sufficient justification