Добавил:
Опубликованный материал нарушает ваши авторские права? Сообщите нам.
Вуз: Предмет: Файл:

Lesson 5

.docx
Скачиваний:
2
Добавлен:
23.08.2019
Размер:
73.76 Кб
Скачать

Lesson 5: Epistemology

 

 

 

Introduction

"The study of knowledge is one of the most fundamental aspects of philosophical inquiry. Any claim to knowledge must be evaluated to determine whether or not it indeed constitutes knowledge. Such an evaluation essentially requires an understanding of what knowledge is and how much knowledge is possible (IEP 2011)." Therefore, this field concerns itself with the nature of knowledge, as well as how it can be learned, retained, and disseminated in various areas of thought and inquiry. The major concepts and issues related to epistemology will be presented briefly in the following sections of this lesson.

 

What is Knowledge?

            This is one of the foundational issues in epistemology. It may seem like a simple enough question, but the issue is actually quite complex. Indeed, volumes of philosophical works have been written on this subject alone. While all knowledge is of epistemological interest; including mundane knowledge such as knowing a person, how to bake a cake, or being familiar with the layout of a city's streets; this particular area of study concerns itself more with the "... the origin, nature, methods, and limits of human knowledge (Dictionary.com 2011)." These types of knowledge, known as procedural (or know-how) and acquaintance knowledge, while valid and useful, are not of particular use in the field of epistemology.

            Philosophers are far more concerned about what is known as propositional knowledge. Like propositions in logic, propositional knowledge is based on declarative statements, often including the word "that." This type of proposition, rather than leading to an inductive or deductive conclusion

"…encompasses knowledge about a wide range of matters: scientific knowledge, geographical knowledge, mathematical knowledge, self-knowledge, and knowledge about any field of study whatever. Any truth might, in principle, be knowable, although there might be unknowable truths. One goal of epistemology is to determine the criteria for knowledge so that we can know what can or cannot be known, in other words, the study of epistemology fundamentally includes the study of meta-epistemology (what we can know about knowledge itself)" (IEP, 2011).

            Propositional knowledge itself is divided into two distinct categories based on the source from which the knowledge is derived: a priori and a posteriori. The former posits knowledge can be achieved by reason alone and that experience is unnecessary. The latter claims that reason alone is insufficient for the attainment of knowledge and that only empirically-verifiable experience will do.

            Each of these divisions of propositional knowledge have far-reaching implications not only in epistemology, but also in other areas of philosophical inquiry such as metaphysics, ethics, and others. Indeed, for centuries philosophy was divided into two camps: rationalists, who believed that all knowledge could be based solely on reason (a priori); and empiricists, who believed that all knowledge derived from experience alone (a posteriori). These debates continue today within epistemology and they are at times quite heated.

            Now, having narrowed the definition of knowledge to propositional knowledge, we must understand the nature of knowledge and how it is attained.

 

The Nature of Knowledge

            There are three major criteria that must be met regarding propositional knowledge: belief, truth, and justification. First, it is believed that knowledge is a mental state, meaning it exists within the mind (IEP 2011). Creatures without brains or the ability to think are generally considered to be incapable of knowledge. Thus, knowledge is based on belief.

            However, after a small bit of reflection, it becomes readily apparent not all beliefs are true. While belief is required, not all beliefs constitute knowledge (IEP 2011). Take, for example, the centuries-old view that the Earth was flat. While commonly believed and widely accepted as knowledge, the veracity of this understanding was eventually proven false. So clearly, belief alone is not sufficient for attaining knowledge. Thus, truth must be considered a condition of knowledge, along with belief.

            Justification of knowledge is the final condition that must be met--that is, true beliefs must be arrived at in a proper fashion. In general, this tends to indicate that all beliefs must be true and must be arrived at through a process of reason, a body of objective evidence, or some combination of the two. Justification does not, however, imply absolute certainty. Human beings are, after all, fallible beings and quite capable of error. It does not provide room, either, for correct knowledge obtained by lucky guesses. While the belief arrived at with luck may be true, it is not justified knowledge, since reason and evidence played no part in attaining it.

            While there is a great deal more to the nature of knowledge, for the purposes of this study, we will assume that knowledge derives only from Justified True Beliefs (JTBs). Armed with this rudimentary description of what knowledge is, we turn our attention to how it can be known.

 

How Is Knowing Possible?

            According to most theories, there are two primary ways for human beings to attain knowledge: the first is through presuppositions or reason and the second is through experience and observation (or some combination of the two). Over time, it has become more apparent that the two are not mutually exclusive.

            For example, any empirical data derived about the physical world must involve the human senses (perceptions), which are processed by the human mind (IEP 2011). Likewise, abstract concepts conceived solely by the mind using reason risk not being borne out by the reality of the physical world and should be verified when possible by empirical data (experience).

            Thus, in modern scientific methodology, the two are combined to some extent in the form of the scientific method. First, a hypothesis is formed (in the mind), and then it is tested via experimentation to verify whether or not said hypothesis is true. In this manner, both a priori and a posteriori means can be used to attain knowledge.

 

Enter the Skeptics

"Much of epistemology has arisen either in defense of, or in opposition to, various forms of skepticism. Indeed, one could classify various theories of knowledge by their responses to skepticism. For example, rationalists could be viewed as skeptical about the possibility of empirical knowledge while not being skeptical with regard to a priori knowledge and empiricists could be seen as skeptical about the possibility of a priori knowledge but not so with regard to empirical knowledge" (SEP, 2011)

            In philosophy, the skeptic naturally arose as sort of an intellectual counter-balance to the hitherto unchallenged assertions of the philosophers. While it can be taken to extremes, skepticism can also be used as a tool to hone and refine various philosophical positions, exposing the weaknesses of a given argument or line of thought. In epistemology, skeptics have "...suggested that we do not, or cannot, know anything, or at least that we do not know as much as we think we do (IEP 2011)." Some of the more famous skeptics in philosophy include Sextus Empiricus of Ancient Greece, David Hume, Bishop Jon Wilkins, Joseph Glanvill, Immanuel Kant, A. J. Ayer, and Anthony Flew (Geisler 1980).

Соседние файлы в предмете [НЕСОРТИРОВАННОЕ]