Epistemology, the study of the theory of knowledge, is among the most important areas of philosophy. The questions that it addresses include the following:
What is knowledge?
The first problem encountered in epistemology is that of defining knowledge. Much of the time, philosophers use the tripartite theory of knowledge, which analyses knowledge as justified true belief, as a working model. The tripartite theory has, however, been refuted: Gettier cases show that some justified true beliefs do not constitute knowledge. Rival analyses of knowledge have been proposed, but there is as yet no consensus on what knowledge is. This fundamental question of epistemology remains unsolved.
Though philosophers are unable to provide a generally accepted
…show more content…
There are two traditions: empiricism, which holds that our knowledge is primarily based in experience, and rationalism, which holds that our knowledge is primarily based in reason. Although the modern scientific worldview borrows heavily from empiricism, there are reasons for thinking that a synthesis of the two traditions is more plausible than either of them individually.
How are our beliefs justified?
There are better and worse ways to form beliefs. In general terms, it is important to consider evidence when deciding what to believe, because by doing so we are more likely to form beliefs that are true. Precisely how this should work, when we are justified in believing something and when we are not, is another topic in the theory of knowledge. The three most prominent theories of epistemic justification are foundationalism, coherentism, and reliabilism.
How do we perceive the world around
…show more content…
Truth is not in your head but is “out there.” The statement, “The Mariners have never won a world series” is true if the Mariners have never won a world series. No, I didn’t just repeat myself. The first part of that sentence is in quotes on purpose. The phrase in quotes signifies a statement we might make about the world and the second, unquoted phrase is supposed to describe the way the world actually is. The reason philosophers write truth statements this way is to give sense to the idea that a statement about the world could be wrong or, more accurately, false (philosophers refer to the part in quotes as a statement or proposition). Perhaps you can now see why beliefs are different than truth statements. When you believe something, you hold that or accept that a statement or proposition is true. It could be false that’s why your belief may not “match up” with the way the world really
2. A statement that is self-contradictory is seldom true. Self-contradictory arre not true, can 't be a statment can 't prove a self-contradictoy is true. 3. We can tell if a claim is true or false by looking at what it means.
The subjectivity of this comes from if you believe that the right answer is true. To choose whether or not to believe it, is all based off your interest of wanting to do so. or
In the 1963 philosophy paper titled “Is Justified True Belief Knowledge?”, Edmund Gettier attempts to deconstruct and disprove the philosophical argument that justified true belief is knowledge. Justified true belief, also commonly referred to as JTB, is used as a certain set of conditions that are used to explain someone s knowing some sort of proposition p. More specifically, JTB is used to say that s has knowledge of p if and only if p is true, s believes that p is true, and s is justified in believing that p is true. Gettier offers main points as the conclusion of his argument against this claim. First, he states that s can be justified in believing that p is true while p is actually false.
A questions for metaphysics is what is its purpose in the world? Epistemology is distinguishing your beliefs from an opinion. It makes us think of what we know to do and how we know to do it. Epistemology is from the Greek word “epistēmē” which means knowledge. How do we know to do that?
Since Edmund Gettier published his work on justified true belief as knowledge, there have been a plethora of philosophers poking holes in his theory while attempting to discover alternate solutions to his theory. Linda Zagzebski is one of the many philosophers who criticizes and attempts to resolve the Gettier problems in her article, “The Inescapability of the Gettier Problems,” providing concice reasoning as to why they are truly inescapable. According to Zagzebski, the contradictions between reaching the truth via the correct casual connection and the use of warrant, or justification, for obtaining truth are the root issues of the Gettier Problems, and knowledge can only be obtained by means of meeting certain conditions. One of the key
Every research project provides a link between a paradigm, epistemology, theoretical perspective, and research practice. A paradigm is identified in any school of thought – the integrated worldviews held by researchers and people in general that determine how these individuals perceive and attempt to comprehend truth (Fitzpatrick, Sanders, & Worthen, 2003). Furthermore, a paradigm includes an epistemological belief as well as an ontological belief that, when combined together, govern perceptions and choices made in the pursuit of scientific truth. In practice, individuals’ epistemological beliefs determine how they think knowledge or truth can be comprehended, what problems – if any – are associated with various views of pursuing and presenting knowledge and what role researchers play in its discovery (Robson, 2002). Different epistemologies offer different views of researchers’ relationships with their object of inquiry.
William K. Clifford’s “The Ethics of Belief” is an essay about justification and how we are morally required to prove our beliefs. Clifford’s theory throughout the essay was “It is wrong always, everywhere, and for anyone, to believe anything upon insufficient evidence.” Clifford thinks that it is a moral obligation for you to confirm each of your beliefs with sufficient proof, no matter how questionable or insignificant the beliefs may be. I believe he thinks this because beliefs have serious effects and consequences on others.
In Epistemology, there are sub categories as well. These are called Rationalism and Empiricism. Rationalism will be discussed in this paper, and there are two philosophers that follow this method. There names are Rene Descartes and Plato. Plato and Descartes are two Greek philosophers that believe in Rationalism, yet both have a different perspective of it.
STATEMENT OF BELIEF The following is the statement of faith from the Godfirst church. The following are statements, which the church holds onto as being truths taken from scriptures. The statements are broken down into section regarding: the trinity, God the father, Jesus Christ, Holy Spirit, The Bible and many more. For the purposes of this assignment we will take a look some of the statements of truth.
Clifford argues that all beliefs must be justified. In his writing, The Ethics of Belief, Clifford states that “it is wrong always, everywhere, and for anyone, to believe in anything upon insufficient evidence” (Clifford 5). Clifford means that it is morally wrong to believe something without sufficient evidence. This can be a problem when one examines the very definition of belief. A belief is a thought, which may have a foundation in reality, but does not require it.
One of the main features of this theory is that "truth” consists
My definition of knowledge is a true fact or justified belief that is acquired through a persons experience and education. To a great extent, faith does play a role in deciding if knowledge we acquire has purpose and meaning in our lives however, sometimes faith does not play a role. Personal lives refers to our day to day life and how knowledge provides us with meaning and purpose in it. Its how we take shared knowledge and apply it to our individual perceptions and perspectives of our lives. Knowledge provides with the understanding of the world and gives us meaning in life.
Whilst the knower’s perspective is always essential in the pursuit of knowledge, it’s essence is greater in some areas of knowledge than others. Perspective shapes both what we pursue in knowledge and it affects how we interpret pursued knowledge. Whilst the latter has greater influence over subjective areas such as the arts and history, the former affects even the pursuit of knowledge in more objective areas such as the natural sciences and maths. What’s more, for knowledge to be knowledge, there must be a knower. Each individual knower gains knowledge through the ways of knowing reason and emotion (amongst others); these ways of knowing shape and are shaped by our perspective.
Other truths include facts such as, “There are 12 inches in 1 foot.” Then there are truths that people connect to their identity: race, gender, career, etc. People connect the word “truth” to all these subjects. When focusing on the actual definition of truth this doesn’t seem entirely the connect usage of the word.
Rationalism and empiricism are two methods that can be understood under the concept of epistemology, psychology and philosophy of psychology to understand where the source of knowledge comes from. “In psychology and its philosophy, empiricism and rationalism concern the sources of psychological states and capacities that may include, but are not confined to, state of knowledge (Longworth, 2009).” Rationalism states a priori knowledge, deduction and the concept of an active mind. According to rationalist, our minds have innate set of principles and skills. If we only use our logic in accordance with these principles is enough to obtain accurate information about all the objects that make up the universe.