Philosophy - Epistemology - What is Knowledge?

Name the three types of knowledge.

Ability knowledge, knowledge by acquaintance, propositional knowledge

What do each types of knowledge mean?

Ability knowledge: knowledge that you obtain from experience or ‘doing’

Acquaintance knowledge: knowledge that you obtain from your senses

Propositional knowledge: knowledge that is obtained and expressed through language

What does Linda Zagzebski define propositional knowledge and what is the nature of definition?

She defines propositional knowledge as knowledge that is indirect and knowledge that is communicated, as the thinker is presented with a true proposition. According to her the nature of definition should NOT be: obscure (the definition itself should not be more confusing than the thing its trying to define), circular (one thing should not be defined by another thing who’s definition is the thing trying to be defined), or negative (the definition should not be something that it’s not, e.g. the definition of black can’t be “not white”).

What is the tripartite definition of propositional knowledge?

A Justified, True Belief.

What are Gettier Cases and what problems do they pose to the tripartite definition of knowledge?

Cases of justified true belief where it does not count as actual knowledge due to the nature of the JTB being a lucky scenario. If knowledge is truly a justified and true belief, then there is no distinction between genuine JTBs and lucky JTBs.

What were Edmund Gettier’s two original Gettier Cases?

The Job and the Coins:

1. Smith and Jones both apply for a job

2. Smith has justified that Jones will get the job, and Smith also knows that Jones has 10 coins in his pocket.

3. Smith therefore has a justified belief that the man with 10 coins in his pocket will get the job.

4. Contrarily, Smith gets the job, but coincidentally also has 10 coins in his pocket.

Therefore, Smith believes that his justified belief is true, and is therefore knowledge, but was actually simply a huge stroke of luck.

The Ford and Barcelona;

1. Smith has justified that Jones owns a Ford, and Jones has offered him a lift.

2. Using logical addition (if P is true, then P or Q is true), Smith says “Either Jones owns a Ford, or Brown is in Barcelona”

3. Smith therefore believes that Brown is not in Barcelona.

4. However, the Ford that Smith has justified to Jones is actually a rental car, and Brown happens to be in Barcelona.

5. Therefore the statement is true, but Smith does not know it is true, as he has based it on a false premise.

What is the difference between conditions that are individually necessary and conditions that are jointly sufficient?

Conditions that are individually necessary will not yield the object when the condition is taken away, and conditions that are jointly sufficient will always yield the object in question. To understand: an object that has four straight lines and four 90 degree angles with two sets of parallel line could be a square OR a rectangle, meaning they are individually necessary, but not jointly sufficient, as a square must have all sides the same length.

What is the strong and weak objection to belief not being individually necessary for the tripartite definition of knowledge?

Strong objection (Plato): Belief is falliable, as it can be wrong, and knowledge is infallible, as you cannot know something that is false, so the two are incompatible.

Weak objection: you can know something without believing you know it (e.g. muscle memory after not playing an instrument for years).

What are the rebuttals to the strong and weak objections of belief being individually necessary?

Strong objection: it is true that beliefs are fallible and can be false, but the tripartite definition of knowledge asks for TRUE beliefs.

Weak objection: every time that you make a proposition about something you believe not to know, you are believing that you know it on a rolling basis.

What are the two theories on the definition of truth? Briefly explain.

Correspondence theory: the truth is the truth if the proposition is actually the case and aligns with reality

Coherence theory: the truth is the truth if the proposition is one that is held by the web of society to be true, as in, many people believe that it is true

What is the first response to strengthen the tripartite definition?

That justification should be so strong that belief must be true/the belief cannot be rationally doubted (infallibilist).

What are the strengths and weaknesses of the infallibilist definition of knowledge?

It does not leave room for Gettier Cases, as they necessarily involve beliefs that can be rationally doubted but by luck turn out to be true. However, the infallibilist definition of knowledge is very strict, so we might not ‘know’ anything at all apart from foundational axioms like the cogito and arithmetic.

What is the second response to strengthening the tripartite view?

Adding a ‘no false lemmas’ condition, meaning the knowledge should not be inferred from something that is assumed to be true.

What are the strengths and weaknesses of the ‘no false lemmas’ condition?

It removes the validity of Gettier Cases as the belief that Jones will get the job and that Jones drives a Ford are both false lemmas used to justify the proposition. However, Linda Zagzebski says that you can construct Gettier-style cases that don’t include a false lemmas.

What is the third response to strengthening the tripartite view?

Replacing the justification condition with ‘reliably formed’, as in rather than justifying knowledge we should seek to gain knowledge using reliable processes that tend to yield truth.

What are considered reliable cognitive processes?

• Simple arithmetic

• Short term memory

• Reading from a reliable source

• Seeing things up close

Why is reliabilism considered an externalist view?

The reliable processes don’t have to be accessible to the agent in order for the agent to have knowledge and it does not have to include a conscious thought process.

What are the strengths and weaknesses of the reliabilist definition of knowledge?

It reject Gettier Cases as if a proposition happens to be true by luck, it is not formed through a reliable processes as inferences from possible falsehoods aren’t reliable. However, the externalist nature of reliabilism means that there could be an external process that you aren’t aware of that means you do not have knowledge.

What is the fourth response to strengthening the tripartite view?

Replacing the justification condition with an account of epistemic virtue.

Explain virtue ethics and how this relates the the tripartite view.

Virtue ethics is an agent centered set of ethics that teaches you what kind of person you should be. If a virtuous person would do an action, this is how everyone should act. Since virtue ethics is agent centered, virtue epistemology says that someone has epistemic virtue if they actively seek out knowledge.

What are the strengths and weaknesses of epistemic virtue?

It eliminates Gettier cases, as virtue epistemology says that a person should actively seek out the truth in order for it to be called knowledge. However, this view rules out children and animals having knowledge as they might not actively be seeking out to know the truth, or even know the concept of virtues in the first place, when they arguably can hold knowledge.