Justifications are the actions of proving or showing something to be right or reasonable. To prove something to be right, you need to have to support the justification to make it stronger. If you think about the knowledge people have, it is usually based on how much you’ve learned about things; so you either you know it or you don’t. How can you prove something you know? Our knowledge and the confidence we have on believing on it, is based on the justifications given from different sources. The example of justification can be classified in different ways such as the origin of the justification, in from the other sources, the personal experiences, and our instincts that can collide with emotions. Throughout this essay I’ll explain different …show more content…
Knowledge refers to the acquaintance of facts, information, and skills through experience, education, or sight. Instead value refers to the regard that something is held to deserve importance or usefulness of something. In the question being analyzed, we practically are intended to find how we determine the “knowledge that we value”. For example, an experiment’s conclusion is based on results achieved during the experiment. This shows us how the results determine the knowledge we acquired truth because it can be proven. The more we can prove something, the more value it has. This can allude to another question; does something need to be true for it to be valuable? Truth is the concept of something being in accordance with fact or reality. For example, I could say my friend Sophie has curly hair and it a valuable knowledge because I can see it and it’s the objective truth. In this case the knowledge is valuable because its true, but this concept can be disputed. If we take into consideration Christianity, which is the religion based on the person and teachings of Jesus Christ, is this information valuable? It may be very valuable to people who believe in Christ, but the only justifications are the testaments or bibles. If know one sees Jesus, can it be a valuable knowledge? As a Christian I believe in Christ, but an atheist would lack he’s or she’s belief in his existence. We don’t always value the knowledge with the strongest …show more content…
Every person has his or her own interpretation of justifications when expressing the understanding of something. This knowledge interpreted by an individual may be true, if it is objective facts confirmed by others. But when it comes to what an individual knows it can be insignificant when compared to different understandings from other individuals that are in the world, even if the individual had strong justifications. For example a common global issue today is the LGBT rights, which have a lot of justifications supporting and against it. The question is; are LBGT rights a human right? Different people, in this case, countries, interpret this issue different ways due to the knowledge that provides the strongest justifications. So let’s imagine and consider that both pro and con have strong justifications, but what should we value more? In this situation our personal experience or knowledge could come in and affect our belief, and this is when the “Ways of Knowing” concept comes through. Maybe our faith can influence our choice of which knowledge to value, even if both have strong justifications. Another influence can be our reasoning in an objective and logical way, all humans should have rights and not be discriminated. It can be concluded, for these examples, that personal experience results in our knowledge and that can influence people’s decision in supporting which knowledge to
Shafer-Landau, Russ. "Moral Reasons." Foundations of Ethics. Ed. Russ Shafer-Landau and Terence Cuneo. Malden: Blackwell, 2007. 312-327. Print.
Stocker highlights the constraints that motives impose on both ethical theory and the ethical life in order to show that only when justifications and motives are in harmony can people lead the good life. Stocker believes that mainstream ethical theories, like consequentialism and deontology, make it impossible for people to reconcile their reasons and motives because these theories demand that people perform acts for the sake of duty or for the good, as opposed to because they care about the people who are affected by their actions.
In order to succeed one needs truth. Everyone is capable of making decisions, however, truth is a key accessory to making such decisions better. One must be aware that what one believes, imagines, and desires to be true, are all different (Blackburn, 2009). Defining truth is difficult for some claim truth is concrete and can be proved in a structural manner. Others simply avoid the definition saying it is too abstract to be narrowed down into a single statement the world can agree on. For example, students have different ways of learning, thus to each student, a particular learning style is the best way to learn, and that is the student’s truth. Many have tried to tackle the definition of truth and from it came about the Correspondence Theory,
This essay attempts to capitalize on Goldman 's “What is justified belief?” to form an opinion about his ideas. Goldman makes a break from traditional views of knowledge to form a theory of externalism. He gives the reader a new point of view for observing the relationship between knowledge and justification. The following passage will weed out some important aspects of his theory and how they relate to his theory as a whole.
In the simplest of terms, human rights are those that undoubtedly belong to each person. These rights, from a philosophical standpoint, have certain characteristics that distinguish them from any other. According to Richard Wasserstrom, author of the article, "Rights, Human Rights, and Racial Discrimination," human rights embody several characteristics. Primarily, and perhaps obviously, human rights are those that belong solely to humans (Wasserstrom 631). Moreover, Wasserstrom...
The philosopher, Linda Zagzebski, offers a virtue based definition of knowledge. She arrives at this definition by presenting numerous accounts of knowledge definitions that fail, explore why they fail, then shows how her theory satisfies knowledge criteria.
For us to understand the importance of knowledge, we first have to understand what knowledge is. Knowledge can be given to us by experience with something new or it can be acquired through experience. There is always a purpose for acquiring the information. There is a saying that “knowledge is power.” If you think practically, then knowledge is definitely giving you power to dictate your direction in life.
Finally, the argument must be reasonable and logical to the people who need convincing. The person who wins the argument isn’t always right, but they were able to convince an audience that they were by vouching for their character, appealing to human emotion, and by creating a reasonable and logical justification. In the essay,
First it is important to define what truth actually means, truth defined is, the state of being the case, real things, events and facts. The definition is not, opposite from a lie or what works or what is comprehensive, which is what many people define it as. Now that truth has been defined, there are many characteristics of truth. One of those characteristics is that truth is discovered, not invented. Meaning that truth already existed way before people even discovered what truth is.
Proponents of human rights argue that the concept’s universality rests in its non-discriminatory character- human rights are meant for every human being- rich and poor, white and black, men and women, young and old, leaders and followers, elites and illiterate, etc- and are all treated equally.
Sentiments such as beauty, revenge, pleasure, pain, create moral motivation, and action, and are immune to falsity and truth. They are the foundation for which morals are built, and exist apart from any reasoning. Thesis: In moral motivation, the role of sentiment is to drive an intrinsically instilled presence within us to examine what we would deem a moral act or an immoral act, and act accordingly, and accurately upon the sentiments that apply. These sentiments may be assisted by reasons, but the reason alone does not drive us to do what we feel is necessary.
Production of knowledge is generally seen in a positive light. However, when ethics and morality become involved in the process of production, judgements will undoubtedly be made that may seem to limit the availability of that knowledge. Ethical judgements are made by the combination of a knower, his or her standard of value, and the situation itself. In the field of the arts and natural sciences, ethics plays a crucial role in the extent one may possibly be allowed to go when discovering new knowledge. Reason and emotion are important ways of knowing that help guide knowers in making certain moral decisions.
If it cannot be experienced, then there is no real benefit of this knowledge. If there is no benefit, then logically, the knowledge is not valuable in terms of the individual purposes of any human. Therefore, the value of knowledge is diminished if it is not applied and it would be fair to say that the use with purpose is the only way to develop and maintain knowledge. Furthermore, how can any knowledge that cannot be used be useful? Indeed, if some information is not applicable to any aspects of a particular person’s life, then this person is extremely likely to forget it. This implies that the value of knowledge is relative to each individual knower and always depends on his/her own perspective. Therefore, the application does determine the value. Whereas, without application in the real world the knowledge is just a belief since it cannot be experienced and thus cannot be
…rights which are inherent to the human being ... human rights acknowledges that every single human being is entitled to enjoy his or her human rights without distinction as to race, [color], sex, language, religion, political or other opinion, national or social origin, property, birth or other status. [To add on, human] rights are legally guaranteed by human rights law, protecting individuals and groups against actions that interfere with fundamental freedoms and human dignity (Human rights for
Value is the wish that something is held to deserve; the importance, worth, or utility of something or principles or standards of behaviour; one's opinion of what is significant in life . As human beings, there’s things we value as such, as material and physical values, economic values, moral values, societal values, political values, aesthetical values, spiritual values and rational values. As humans, we would like to think we are in charge of our own values and what is worthy of our desires (instrumental values). Merely this is incorrect for there’s intrinsic values, values that are valuable for the grounds of their nature such as life. For lesson, our human body demands water, why do we drink water because we need to life, but why do we need to life?