Knowledge, its source and truthfulness have been under question for a long time. People have always wondered what exactly constitutes facts and if there are any defining laws that can be attributed to all knowledge or information available in the world. Many philosophers speculated on how information can be interpreted according to its falsity or truthfulness, but have not come to definite conclusions. Edmund Gettier has provided one of the key pieces in understanding and trying to figure out what knowledge really is.
The Gettier problem is a concept that links relative information supported by a form of reasonable assumption and the truthful outcome. Because the process contains an assumption and it happens to be the end result, it does not mean that it is universal and can be applied to all situations and the definitions of knowledge. The fact that plays a significant role for one to come up with the end result, it is a guess and it is not bound by proper reasoning or factual information. This sort of deduction is not logical and so, is not reliable. For example, a person goes to a store and predicts that there will be a lineup of 10 people. They base this supposition on a mere guess and do not know for sure. When they get to the store, there are indeed 10 people in the line. The fact that this prediction and end result are the same makes the prediction true, appearing as knowledge. A lot of factors come into play here as the assumption could have been made according to the personal characteristics of a person. The individuals could have been keen observers and every time they went to the store, there were an approximate number of 10 people. Even if it was 7, 9 or 12, it was in close proximity to 10. Today, the person felt and s...
... middle of paper ...
...ective and previous knowledge, as well as comprehension and understanding of information are things that determine the end result. Even the definition of a concept or reality can be different. Gravity is just a word attributed to a physical law but other civilizations might use different terminology. Does the name of a physical law make it knowledge or does the law itself, being in existence, make it true, thus being true knowledge. It seems that knowledge is simply a general and unspecifically defined characteristic of the surrounding environment. It is a criterion that is made up for easy transference of information between people.
The true definition and characteristics of knowledge are relative and can only be specified by each individual situation. The question of what knowledge is could be labeled as irrelevant while the true question is why it is in existence?
Life without knowledge would be worthless. Talking about knowledge what i mean is knowledge about something. The description of the state of some object is knowledge. The object may be either abstract or physical. Some examples of abstract things include memory, feelings and time. But how we obtain knowledge? Many philosophers tried to find an adequate answer to this question. They came up with so many theories summarizing the process of knowledge. But none of them all was able to state a clear definition of pure knowledge. One of those philosophers is Plato. In this essay I am going to discuss the concept of knowledge according to Plato’s philosophic conception of knowledge. I will clarify what knowledge is not perception. And from this I will move to explain the justified true belief theory. Then I will show the lack in this theory by referring to counterexamples: the Gettier cases. To end up with a conclusion that states what is my understanding of the process of knowledge.
Knowledge is defined as information and skills one acquires through experience or education. There is; however, a certain knowledge than cannot be certain and is unjustifiable from the scientific perspective. Karen Armstrong, Robert Thurman, and Azar Nafisi wrote about this type of knowledge in their essays: “Homo Religiosus,” “Wisdom,” and “Reading Lolita in Tehran,” respectively. Each of these authors has a different view of what knowledge is exactly, how it can be achieved, and what it means to have achieved it, but each author takes on the view that the concept of knowledge should be viewed from a social stance. Armstrong refers to this uncertain knowledge as “myth,” Thurman refers to it as “wisdom,” and Nafisi refers to it as “upsilamba";
General ideas can be formed by the mind without the use of our senses or sensory organs. Senses are acquired at birth but, the essentials of knowledge, truth and being, is slowly and hardly gain through many years of education, experience, and reflection later on. We now know that we cannot get the essentials of knowledge, truth and being for perception itself. Therefore knowledge cannot be based on
There are many philosophical stories that try to explain the meaning of true and false (Armour-Garb 258). Human beings have to find a way of communicating with each other. The process of determining what has been said, presented or occurred is true is referred to as the criterion of truth (Kulvicki 20). There are various procedures to determine the criterion of truth where different scholars have developed varying claims on what should be concealed as truth and false. In most cases, for a long time, the truth has been identified to be related to facts, reality or specific standards and originality (Armour-Garb 262). Modern definitions of truth revolve around authenticity based on factual or logical evidence. The concept of truth has created debate among philosophers, scholars, in art and religion (Kulvicki 259). Most philosophers point that the concept of truth can only be discussed on its terms that it cannot be described in any other context. In this
Consider the following situation. There are two men, Smith and Jones, who are both applying for a job. The man Smith has heard from the CEO of the company that Jones will get the job, and has also counted that Jones has ten coins in his pocket. From the statements “Jones will get the job”, and “Jones has ten coins in his pocket”, Smith creates the statement “The man with ten coins in his pocket will get the job”. Unknown to Smith, he also has ten coins in his pocket, and he ends up getting the job. It seems that in this case Smith is correct, but he does not have knowledge. By presenting this problem, Gettier has demonstrated that someone can have a justified true belief and still not have knowledge. I would like to refer to this problem as
Mark Twain, an American author and humorist, once stated that “Truth is stranger than fiction, but it is because fiction is obliged to stick to possibilities; Truth isn't.” (Quotes about truth) Truth is defined as “the quality or state of being true.” (Free Merriam Webster). As there are various ways to plug truth into context, multiple different theories are used to categorize truth. Three of which will be reflected in this essay in order to discuss some similarities, but furthermore to point out the differences of truth for the areas of knowledge, mathematics, natural science, and the arts.
Rationalists would claim that knowledge comes from reason or ideas, while empiricists would answer that knowledge is derived from the senses or impressions. The difference between these two philosophical schools of thought, with respect to the distinction between ideas and impressions, can be examined in order to determine how these schools determine the source of knowledge. The distinguishing factor that determines the perspective on the foundation of knowledge is the concept of the divine.
Affordable space for young entrepreneurs in Sydney emerges as a wicked problem. A wicked problem is characterised by the inability to define the problem, and is often incomplete, complex and has changing requirements (Briggs 2007). Startups that have more resources and better financing are more likely to survive (Headd 2003). Thus its crucial to an entrepreneur and employees that office spaces are well-connected by public transport, and have no traffic congestion problems. However achieving this is difficult, as conflicting views among stakeholders on how to best utilize the city places, and interconnected issues such as growing population and environmental issues are prevalent.
How we approach the question of knowledge is pivotal. If the definition of knowledge is a necessary truth, then we should aim for a real definition for theoretical and practical knowledge. Methodology examines the purpose for the definition and how we arrived to it. The reader is now aware of the various ways to dissect what knowledge is. This entails the possibility of knowledge being a set of truths; from which it follows that one cannot possibly give a single definition. The definition given must therefore satisfy certain desiderata , while being strong enough to demonstrate clarity without losing the reader. If we base our definition on every counter-example that disproves our original definition then it becomes ad hoc. This is the case for our current defini...
In the first Gettier counterexample, Smith is justified in believing that Jones is the man who will get the job. Smith’s also justified in believing that Jones has ten coins in his pocket. From that he infers and has a justified belief that the man who will get the job has ten coins in his pocket. It turns out that the man who gets the job is not Jones but Smith, and Smith does in fact have ten coins in his pocket. Smith has a justified true belief that the man who will get the job has ten coins in his pocket. However, this shouldn’t count as knowledge.
"Knowledge, Truth, and Meaning." Cover: Human Knowledge: Foundations and Limits. Web. 17 Feb. 2011. .
Plato describes knowledge in terms of what it is not. Knowledge is not content, as defined in Theaetetus. In this example, Theaetetus doesn’t quite understand what knowledge is and when asked by Socrates describes knowledge as science, geometry, etc. Socrates tells him that his answer is what knowledge is of, not what knowledge is (McMahon). Knowledge is also not perception. Knowledge is defined as being infallible and therefore cannot be defined by perception, which focuses on subjective appearances, not truth of what is. Perceptions vary from man to man and one perception cannot be deemed superior or wiser to another man’s perception because each man’s perception is his subjective “truth”. Therefore, perception is not knowledge. Knowledge is also defined by Plato as not being judgement. In Theaetetus it is revealed that knowledge of tangible objects is impossible and that “true” or real knowledge must be universal and unshakable. Universal knowledge must be stable, unchanging, and must be able to be understood in a clear and scientific definition. Scientific knowledge aims to describe
Before getting into the specifics of Gettier’s criticisms of the JTB theory, it is important to first understand the context of the understanding of knowledge itself, and why it is related to belief. True Belief theory of knowledge is a straightforward concept that only requires that two criteria, relating to belief and truth respectively, be met. To stick with my
Descartes defines knowledge as doubt and uncertainty. He describes that our main source of knowledge is our sense perception.
The general concept of ‘information’ is used in a confused manner. By some it is seen as something we distil from data in order to make decisions, and to a point this could be a true observation. By others it is seen in terms of the understanding that we gain from messages or the knowledge that one person communicates to another and the meanings we create and exchange.