Justified True Belief

735 Words2 Pages
bulb-icon

Recommended: Plato's Theory of Knowledge

Justified True Belief

'Justified true belief' was Plato's attempt to bring rigour to his claim to know something. Briefly explain what he meant by 'justified true belief' and, more importantly, attempt to relate it to your own ways-of-knowing and your personal conviction of what it is to know something.

Plato founded an academy almost two and a half thousand years ago that was concerned with validating its knowledge in the areas of science, mathematics and philosophy. On what grounds can we be certain that we really know something? This was the question addressed by Plato himself and the students of the academy. Plato's answer was that knowledge must be certain Knowledge. Certain Knowledge must be believable, true and justified.

This is the basis of 'justified true belief'. So for a piece of knowledge to be valid according to Plato's 'justified true belief' theory you must be able to believe the statement, your belief has to be true and your belief must be justified. An example of this is to take the statement that 'all living things are made of cells'. For this statement to be true it must pass three tests, firstly you must believe that all living things are made of cells. All living things must be made of cells if you know one that is not then your belief is not true which it must be. Finally, you must have justification for the statement that you know all living things are made of cells.

What are the ways for me to know something keeping in mind Plato's 'justified true belief' theory? There are a number of ways of knowing something such as empirically, by authority, by memory, instinctively, through practice, through acquaintance, through introspection, by empathy, by faith and through the conscience. These ar...

... middle of paper ...

...tatement true? Truth is Public, Truth is independent of anyone's belief and truth is eternal according to Philosophers who have for many years been debating the issue with Politicians. In my opinion the above statements about truth are an acceptable way of testing how true a statement is but I am very aware of how it may conflict with ways of knowing such as faith. Is a person's belief in god true if it is not true for everybody? In my opinion, it is but the fact that it is not true for everybody could make it not so under these statements. I am sure there are people who would disagree.

In my opinion, although there are points of discussion such as the definition of truth and justification Plato's 'Justified True belief' is a working theory that that can be applied to examples. Plato's theory has been well respected for due reason for many years and still is today.

Show More
Related

  • Comparison Of The Theaetetus And Skepticism: Mercedes Dreyer

    1684 Words  | 4 Pages

    The Theaetetus is composed of three main parts, each part being allotted to a different definition of what constitutes as knowledge. While the Theaetetus is focused primarily on how to define knowledge, the arguments faced by Socrates and Theaetetus greatly resemble arguments made by different later theories of knowledge and justification. I will argue in this essay that due to the failure faced by Socrates and Theaetetus in their attempt at defining knowledge, the conclusion that would be best fit for their analysis would be that of skepticism. In doing this I will review the three main theses, the arguments within their exploration that resemble more modern theories of knowledge and justification, and how the reason for the failure of the theories presented in the Theaetetus are strikingly similar to those that cause later theories of epistemology to fail.

    Read More

  • Plato And Charles Peirce: The Meaning Of Truth, Knowledge And Knowledge

    947 Words  | 2 Pages

    For many years humans have pursued the meaning of truth, knowledge and understanding. For many this pursuit of understanding the meaning of truth doesn’t end until one finds a “truth” that is nourishing to them. Even if this is the case one may choose to look for an alternate truth that may be more satisfactory to them. This pursuit of truth does not always have to follow the same path as there may be different ideas for everyone on how truth is actually obtained and which is a better way to obtain the truth is. Two philosophers of their time, Plato and Charles Peirce had their own methodologies and ideas on how truth and knowledge could be obtained.

    Read More

  • Plato's Doctrine of Recollection

    412 Words  | 1 Pages

    Since the Forms are stable and perfect, knowledge of the Forms is infallible and certain. Plato differentiates between true knowledge - knowledge of the Forms, and true opinion - claims about particulars, which can be based on empirical testing of our world as well as on our implicit knowledge of the Forms. We might claim that the sun will rise tomorrow, but do not have true knowledge of this event, since nothing in our world is fixed. The sun, for example, is continuously changing temperature and size. Similarly, while a true opinion of the Form of Virtue might lead us to act virtuously in many situations, knowledge of Virtue would lead us to act with Virtue in every situation.

    Read More

  • Plato Vs. Epicacetus: The Philosophies Of Plato And Epictetus

    1495 Words  | 3 Pages

    One of the main points of Plato’s philosophy was that he believed that people should not so easily trust their senses. In “The Allegory of the Cave”, Plato argues that what we perceive of the world through our sense does not give us the entire picture of what is really there. He states that what we can see is only shadows of what is true, but since we are born believing what we see, we don’t know that there is anything missing at all. Plato believed that in the “knowable realm”, the form of the good, the ultimate truth, is the last thing that we can see, which requires more effort that simply perceiving it. This ultimate truth can only be found through being able to not only perceive, but to be dragged out of the cave, or to be able to think. He likely believed this because through education, he felt that there was an ordering occurring in the mind that allowed for thoughts to become more focused, and clearer. As these thoughts became clearer, s...

    Read More

  • Plato’s Allegory of the Cave and The Matrix

    2260 Words  | 5 Pages

    ... middle of paper ... ... By examining Plato’s use of themes as well as a modern-day comparison to the allegory, one can best grasp the concept of knowledge and how the Sun and our senses guide our education. The concept of our knowledge being a result of our surroundings in the world, rather than a text book, is simply fascinating.

    Read More

  • Essay On Theaetetus

    1436 Words  | 3 Pages

    - Chappell, Timothy. "Plato on Knowledge in the Theaetetus." Stanford University. Stanford University, 07 May 2005. Web. 08 May 2014.

    Read More

  • Conversation Between Plato and Aristotle

    741 Words  | 2 Pages

    ...ver changing and so is the world we live in. Plato: What it comes down to is that true knowledge is that of which is truly real. This is because objects that are of the true knowledge are just forms and that is because objects of a person's sense perception are only real to a certain extent and that certain extent is only because they participate in the Forms. Plato: Well class that is all we have for today. Thank you for listening to our theories, and we hope that it gave you something to think about. Class dismissed! The side I believe with most would be based on Plato's Theory of Knowledge. The reason I chose his theory is because I do truly feel knowledge is a true belief of one's own perception. The way I view things is different than how someone else views them. For example; an very old wilted tree would look beautiful to me but someone else may see it as ugly

    Read More

  • Plato vs Aristotle

    1826 Words  | 4 Pages

    ...nses while Plato only trusted his reason. Plato felt that only with our reason could we understand and obtain true knowledge. We can only have ‘opinions’ about what we experience with our senses. He only trusted his reason because “we cannot always trust the evidence of our senses. The faculty of vision can vary from person to person.”(Gaarder 86) He also did not trust the sense because he felt we couldn’t have “true knowledge of something that is in constant state of change.”(Gaarder 85) He trusted reason because he felt reason was the same for every person. Plato only trusts his reason and does not believe what he experiences with his senses while Aristotle felt that experiencing things with our sense is the highest degree of reality and believed all our knowledge comes from what we experienced with our senses. Plato and Aristotle’s theories on metaphysical topics, of ‘forms’ and what is reality are very different and completely opposite.

    Read More

  • Pre-Socratic Influences In Plato

    764 Words  | 2 Pages

    Plato, like Pythagoras, believes that knowledge of pure Forms and of “Being” is the direct path to someone living a life of salvation and of the highest quality. Plato, like Pythagoras, also believed that all of the forms are geometric figures and mathematical in nature. Also, Plato, like Heraclitus, believed that our world is constantly changing, or in a constant flux. Plato, also agreed with Parmenides, who believed that the real world is not the same as the world of our experience.

    Read More

  • What It Means to be a Just Man

    876 Words  | 2 Pages

    The ideas that Plato instills are both detailed and distinctive, on the other hand he believes that actions do not necessarily justify a person but rather, he states that justness is more of an internal virtue. The idea he is trying to convey is that justness comes from the interpretation of the soul rather than the physical functions. The reasoning behind this is that if the soul remains just, then the resulting actions will reflect just ends. Once the fact that the soul must be just is accepted, the question arises of what qualifies the soul as just will need to be answered.

    Read More

  • Plato and Aristotle: Divergent Theories on Knowledge

    1062 Words  | 3 Pages

    Plato and Aristotle propose theories of knowledge in which they both agree that the knower is measure by the known and that knowledge is an exchange within the world. However, their respective theories may be considered polar opposites of one another especially when considering that Aristotle rejects Plato’s theory and admits that ‘informed opinion’, is a form of knowledge whereas Plato rejects opinion as a form of knowledge.

    Read More

  • Plato's The Allegory Of The Cave And Cogito Ergo Sum

    871 Words  | 2 Pages

    Plato and Descartes have similarities and differences in their views about the intellectual ascent and the ability to achieve certain knowledge and the extent of rationality. Both authors agree that in order to attain certainty, we must look beyond the surface and have a deeper understanding, but Descartes argues that, even then, only a few things can be certain. Also, Plato and Descartes both acknowledge that a higher power is the source of reasoning. However, Descartes believes that God is the perfect being and that we should depend on him for truth and reason whereas goodness is the basis of reasoning for Plato. If we follow Plato and Descartes’ philosophies, then we can bypass solely relying on our senses and be fulfilled intellectuals.

    Read More

  • Can You Rightfully Justify A Truth, By Manuel Velasquez

    1121 Words  | 3 Pages

    In the beginning of the text, Manuel Velasquez opens with an assumption of a male having a female mate and the likelihood of the male partner understanding whether or not his so called soul-mate truly loves him or not. This situation is very crucial in terms of the perplexity that one side is battling while the other side is neutral in such circumstances; obviously, all actions are done in a practical manner, but going in depth about justification of truth, one person cannot become convinced because of mental insecurity. So, can knowledge be considered a justified belief? Not in most cases. Many things can be justified including the decisions made, actions, desires and emotions. Concerning propositions and justified statements, a belief can further be understood by an individual or a group of individuals. As a result, to the sharpest degree, justification and truth are not the same even though throughout many philosophers’ journeys, they might consider them the

    Read More

  • Plato vs. Aristotle

    350 Words  | 1 Pages

    Thirdly, Plato and Aristotle hold contrasting views on the mechanism of finding the truth. Plato relied on the ability to reason in his attempt to explain the world. He produced his ideal world based on reason since such a world lies beyond the realm of the five senses. Plato ignored his senses because he believed his senses only revealed the imperfect forms of the ordinary world.

    Read More

  • Epistemology Essay

    1597 Words  | 4 Pages

    Whether someone's belief is true is not a prerequisite for belief. On the other hand, if something is actually known, then it categorically cannot be false. For example, if a person believes that a bridge is safe enough to support him, and attempts to cross it, but the bridge then collapses under his weight, it could be said that he believed that the bridge was safe but that his belief was mistaken. It would not be accurate to say that he knew that the bridge was safe, because plainly it was not. By contrast, if the bridge actually supported his weight, then he might say that he had believed that the bridge was safe, whereas now, after proving it to himself, he knows it was

    Read More

More about Justified True Belief

Open Document