Epistemology 3-markers

What does Linda Zagzebski say a good definition should avoid?

Zagzebski named the definitional pitfalls to avoid as: obscurity (using concepts less simple than the word being defined), ad hoc (to fit a specific purpose), negative (what it isn't, rather than is), and circular (using the term to describe itself).

What is (a) propositional knowledge, (b) ability knowledge, (c) acquaintance knowledge?

Propositional knowledge applies to truth-apt statements of fact (to know THAT Paris is the capital of France). Ability knowledge is the knowledge of HOW, e.g., to get to France (experience-dependent). Acquaintance knowledge is the knowledge OF (what Paris is LIKE - experience-dependent).

How does Linda Zagzebski define propositional knowledge?

Zagzebski believed that a 'real' definition should contain the essence of what it defines, but that propositional knowledge does not possess a fixed essence (it is more likely 'contingent'), and so it has to be defined only by how it can be obtained/analysed. 'A highly valued state in which a person is in cognitive contact with reality.'

Zagzebski thought that a "real" definition should capture the true nature of a thing. But she said knowledge doesn’t have a fixed nature — it's more random or changeable. So, instead of defining what knowledge is, we should define how people get it. She described knowledge as a "highly valued state where a person is in real contact with reality."

What is the difference between a necessary and a contingent truth?

A necessary truth is one where it is logically impossible for it to be false (such as 2+2=4 - i.e. true in all possible worlds), whereas a contingent truth can at least conceivably be false (such as "the sky is blue") without contradiction.

What is the difference between a priori and a posteriori knowledge?

A priori knowledge is knowledge obtained prior to or independently of experience (requiring no worldly observation or evidence, such as basic mathematical truths), whereas a posteriori knowledge is obtained via/after experience (such as water boils at 100 degrees c).

What is the difference between an analytic and a synthetic statement?

An analytic statement is one that is true by definition ("a vixen is a female fox"), whereas a synthetic statement is one that is not true/false by definition, whose truth depends on facts about the world.

What is the distinction between necessary and sufficient conditions?

A necessary condition is one which is definitionally required for a proposition to be true (to be a bachelor, one must necessarily be unmarried). Sufficient conditions are those which, if all are present, fully definitionally constitute a concept (if 'man' and 'unmarried' are present components, a bachelor is guaranteed).

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

Attained via a reliable process/source, which is defined as producing more truth than falsehood. E.g. a teacher is an authority on their subject with an incentive to be honest in their teachings (it's their job).

What is a 'false lemma'?

A false lemma is a false belief/inference/step in reasoning on which a knowledge claim is based. [A 'false lemma' is a proposition assumed to be true for the purpose of a proof, but is actually false.]

What is knowledge, according to epistemic virtue?

Epistemic virtue (a motivational component to the definition of knowledge) requires the motivation to ensure knowledge, combined with the dispositional inclination to obtain knowledge well (e.g., from multiple sources, experts, personal research, etc.) leading to the general success of knowledge claims.

What is infallibilism?

Infallibilism defines knowledge as something which only applies to infallible truths, such as 2+2=4, obtained from infallible sources (reason and intuition, rather than experience) as absolute certainties - i.e.., ones we cannot be wrong about/doubted.

What is reliabilism?

Reliabilism claims that a proposition need only come from a reliable source (this being a source that produces more truth than falsehood - accurate memory; 20:20 vision; advice from an expert etc.) to be valid as knowledge.

What is the tripartite view of propositional knowledge?

Plato's tripartite definition of knowledge claims that the qualities of being a justified true belief are individually necessary and collectively sufficient conditions of propositional knowledge.

What is the difference between direct and indirect realism?

Both theories claim that there exists an objective, mind-independent reality, however direct realists claim that this reality is perceived immediately, as it is, whereas indirect realists claim that we perceive a representation of this reality via a subjective intermediary (sense data).

What is the difference between direct realism and Berkeley's Idealism?

A direct realist believes that there is a mind-independent reality which we perceive directly/immediately, whereas an idealist believes that reality is entirely mind-dependent and thus there is no external/physical reality to be perceived.

What is the difference between indirect realism and Berkeley's idealism?

Indirect realism is the view that the immediate objects of perception are mind-dependent objects (sense data) that are caused by, and represent mind-independent ones (objects). Idealism accepts the immediate objects of perception are mind-dependent, but argues that an immaterial mind (God) rather than a material reality is the cause of these objects.

What is direct realism?

Direct realism is the view that the immediate objects of perception are mind-independent objects and their properties.

What is a 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 view that immediate objects of perception are mind-dependent objects (sense-data/secondary qualities) that are caused by and represent mind-independent objects (primary qualities).

What is Berkeley's idealism?

Berkeley's idealism argues that the immediate objects of perception (i.e. ordinary objects such as tables, chairs, etc) are mind-dependent objects and their qualities. It argues that an immaterial mind (God) rather than a material reality is the cause of our ideas.

What is solipsism?

Solipsism is the view that all you can know for certain is your own mind and its content/ideas, involving the doubt of the external world and other minds. Epistemic solipsism is the acknowledgement of this, whereas ontological solipsism is the practical belief that your mind is all that exists.

What does an innatist about propositional knowledge believe?

An innatist believes that there is a priori propositional knowledge present in the mind at birth/before experience, as opposed to being a 'blank slate'. This is the view of rationalists and is most famously associated with Plato's 'slave-boy' analogy where he attempts to demonstrate knowledge of Pythagoras' theorem as one such example.

What does tabula rasa mean?

Tabula rasa means 'blank slate', and is referred to by empiricists as the state of the mind at birth (this meaning that the mind contains no innate propositional knowledge prior to experience).

What is the distinction between a rationalist and an empiricist?

Rationalists favour reason as a source of knowledge (Descartes led this movement), and believe in innate a priori knowledge present in the mind at birth. Empiricists believe that the only source of knowledge is experience, and thus that the mind is tabula rasa (blank/devoid of propositional knowledge) at birth.

What is the distinction between an impression and an idea?

According to David Hume's empiricism, an impression is a direct experience which leaves an 'imprint' on the mind. An idea is a mind's imperfect replication of an impression, constructed via the mind's imperfect faculties of imagination (Hume's 'copy' principle).

What is the distinction between simple and complex ideas?

Simple ideas consist of one sense (one might have the simple impression of the colour green, or of the texture of paper), whereas complex ideas are multi-sensory, and make up overall concepts (such as the sum redness, roundness, smoothness, etc., of an apple).

What are the two prongs of Hume's Fork?

Hume claimed, with the proposal of a two-pronged 'fork', that for knowledge to count as meaningful it must be one of two things: a) a relation of ideas (a priori, analytic statements, which are necessarily true in all logically possible worlds) or b) a matter of fact (a posteriori, synthetic statements, which are contingently true and experientially observable).

What does Descartes mean by 'clear and distinct Ideas?

Descartes argued that true, infallible knowledge should be based on intuited ideas that are both clear (easily identified, present and accessible to the attentive mind), and distinct (easily separated, sharply distinguishable from other perceptions).

What is Descartes' cogito?

Descartes' cogito argument ('cogito ergo sum', meaning 'I think therefore I am') is the first conclusion he draws from his three waves of methodological doubt. If he doubts, he must think, thus he must exist.

What is the distinction between 'intuition' and 'deduction'

Descartes defined intuition as information gleaned a priori, without any further inference, via 'the natural light of reason'. From these truths, further truths can be obtained through the process of deduction; these are necessarily valid from true premises.

• Intuition: Descartes believed that some truths are immediately known through reason alone, without needing any experience. He called this understanding the "natural light of reason." For example, realizing "I exist" when thinking is an intuitive truth.​

• Deduction: From these clear and certain truths, we can logically derive other truths. If the starting points (premises) are true, then the conclusions we reach through deduction must also be true.

What are Descartes' three 'waves of doubt'?

1. The argument from error/illusion (sense deception)

2. Dreaming (that is it possible I am currently asleep dreaming I am awake) and

3. deception (that an all-powerful demon could be deceiving me about all truths, both a posteriori and a prior).

What is philosophical scepticism?

In philosophy, scepticism or doubt is often employed methodologically to establish what can or cannot be known. It can be local (doubt of a specific instance or field of knowledge - i.e. the argument from error/illusion) or global (the argument from deception).

What is the difference between philosophical scepticism and normal incredulity?

Normal incredulity is when doubt arises as a natural response to an everyday event; this is often trivial and easily resolved (will I catch my train on time). Philosophical scepticism is generally speaking impossible to conclusively resolve, and involving a large idea such as the doubt of the external world (does my train exist!).

What is the distinction between local and global scepticism?

Local scepticism is applied to a particular domain (such as morality or god), whereas global scepticism is the doubt of all that can be doubted (perception/reality/the external world).