Presentation on theme: "Introduction to Epistemology. Perception- Transparency Good case and bad cases: illusion and hallucination Intentionalism- content of experience is same."— Presentation transcript:
Introduction to Epistemology
Perception- Transparency Good case and bad cases: illusion and hallucination Intentionalism- content of experience is same in good and bad cases, thus content of perception is abstract Disjunctivism- no common content thus experience x when x is absent, thus experience doesn’t entail existence
Knowledge- Types Bertrand Russell Knowledge by description I know how motors function Brutus killed Caesar Knowledge by acquaintance I know the color blue when I see it My arm hurts, I am in pain
Knowledge- Types Propositional knowledge Analytic proposition: My dad’s brother is my uncle All triangles have 3 sides Synthetic proposition: My uncle’s hair is black Angelina is very stupid
Knowledge- Types A priori Knowledge: justification is indifferent of experience All bachelors are unmarried A posteriori Knowlegde: justification dependent on empirical evidence or experience Some bachelors are very happy
JTB Analysis Knowledge= Justified True Belief It is raining outside- my belief that is raining outside + hear raindrops, see rains through the window, fragrance of wet soil + actual rains- thus knowledge I feel ill- my belief that I feel ‘ill’+ possible changes in body+ being ill???? [illness- a state of mind]- thus not knowledge
Justified Belief Internally and/or externally justified Logically deduced Empirical evidence No counterevidence present I have seen ghosts- nobody else have seen them, seen but not touched not captured on camera, alternative explanations possible This water is hot- sensation
True Belief Pragmatism- truth value depends upon results Correspondence- claim corresponds with objective reality Coherence- consistency and cohesiveness within all facts Consistency- self contradictory facts cant exist Custom, consensus, intuition
Gettier Problem [Knowledge by virtue of luck… Smith and Jones, who are awaiting the results of their applications for the same job. Each man has ten coins in his pocket. Smith has excellent reasons to believe that Jones will get the job and, furthermore, knows that Jones has ten coins in his pocket (he recently counted them). From this Smith infers, "the man who will get the job has ten coins in his pocket." However, Smith is unaware that he also has ten coins in his own pocket. Furthermore, Smith, not Jones, is going to get the job.
Gettier Problem…predicted for all wrong reasons] While Smith has strong evidence to believe that Jones will get the job, he is wrong. Smith has a justified true belief that a man with ten coins in his pocket will get the job; however, according to Gettier, Smith does not know that a man with ten coins in his pocket will get the job, because Smith's belief is "...true by virtue of the number of coins in Jones's pocket, while Smith does not know how many coins are in Smith's pocket, and bases his belief...on a count of the coins in Jones's pocket, whom he falsely believes to be the man who will get the job.
Solutions to Gettier Problem Infallibility-justification must necessitate the truth i.e. it shouldn’t fail in any way Indefeasibility- no other observation or evidence should prove otherwise Reliabilism- process should be sufficiently reliable Noznick’s definition- truth as knowledge. S believes p, if p were false he wouldn’t believe it, thus it is true
Kirkham’s Response Gettier problem becomes trivial as: Belief= self evident or validly deduced Self-evident or valid deduction= justified True= belief via a method or logically arrives at it Thus J, T and B have fuzzy distinction
Kirkham’s Response Kirkham’s J, T and B or just B entails Founherentablism= Foundationalism [pyramid; basic beliefs support, self evident] + Coherentism[raft;a belief coherent to every other belief in system] + Reliablism [belief is justified by process which gives higher no. of true beliefs than false]
Regress Argument Skepticism One cant know anything Infinite chain of reasoning in justifying one belief by another Responses: Pragmatism, Founherentism, Common sense