What are the three types of knowledge?
Propositional
Ability
Acquaintance
What is proposition knowledge?
Knowing something that can be passed on to someone else, E.g. “Paris is the capital of France” - objective
What is ability knowledge?
Knowing how to do something, E.g, how to drive a car. Cannot be passed on to someone else - subjective
What is acquaintance knowledge?
Knowledge through experience with something, E.g. the smell of strawberries. It cannot be passed onto anyone
What is the tripartite view?
S knows that P if:
- P is true
- S believes that P, and
- S is justified in believing that P
What are the two main problems with the Tripartite view?
- Conditions are not individually necessary
- Conditions are not sufficient
How is belief not a necessary condition for knowledge?
Unconscious knowledge
E.g. I claim to not know the answers of a test, but actually do it and get all answers correct
Incompatibilism = belief and knowledge are different things, so you cannot know something if you only believe it
(Think “I believe God exists”, you can’t KNOW
Or….”I believe I am in pain” - you can only KNOW you are in pain, belief isn’t needed)
What are the two types of truth and how are they different?
Correspondence theory: truth depends on corresponding with facts
Coherence theory: truth depends on cohering with society’s web of generally accepted beliefs
How is justification not necessary for knowledge?
Reliabilism - RTB, true belief is knowledge If it is caused by a reliable process
FOR EXAMPLE: Rabbit smells fox. Rabbit cannot explain why she is justified believing fox is there. But she still knows the fox is there because of her reliable process of smelling
Why is justification necessary for knowledge?
Racist juror example - she had a true belief that a man was guilty of a crime, but because of his race, not for valid reasons.
Did she know he was guilty?
Why is belief necessary for knowledge?
It sounds strange to say that you know something but don’t believe it
Why is truth necessary for knowledge?
You cannot know something if it isn’t true
Why is JTB not jointly sufficient for knowledge?
Gettier cases - JTB that is not knowledge
Smith and Jones are applying for a job
Smith overhears the boss saying that Jones will get the job. He sees Jones has 10 coins, so induces that the man with 10 coins in his pocket will get the job.
Later, Smith gets the job, and sees that he had 10 coins. But did he know?
What are the counterarguments to Gettier-style cases?
- Infallibilism (stronger justification)
- JTB + no false lemmas
- Reliabilism (RTB)
- Virtue epistemology (VTB)
What is infallibilism and how does it respond to Gettier-style cases?
Belief that cannot be reasonably doubted
Smith’s belief that Jones will get the job could be doubted, therefore is not knowledge
How do beliefs about the external world and beliefs about the mind differ? (infallibilism)
External world - the mind needs to correspond with reality in order to be true. This can always be doubted.
Mind - can never be doubted, as they do not go beyond what I am directly aware of, leaving no room for doubt
(E.g. I cannot be fooled into thinking I am in pain)
What is wrong with infallibilism?
Would imply we have very little knowledge - all knowledge through TV shows, books, etc. aren’t truly knowledge
Deviates too far from our everyday use of the word ‘knowledge’
More prescriptive than descriptive
What is no false lemmas and how does it counter Gettier cases?
False lemma = false belief/assumption
Smith’s belief that Jones will get the job is a false lemma, because Smith does instead
What is a fake barn case?
A man is driving through ‘fake barn county’ - all barns in this county are fake, apart from one. He sees the fake barns and forms propositions that there are barns there. Once, he luckily sees the one real barn and again proposes that there is a barn, except he is right this time. This is JTB but not knowledge, just lucky
How do fake barn-style cases counter JTB+N?
Because the man makes no false beliefs other than assuming the barns were real. We cannot question every single assumption we make, especially as they are often unconscious
How could you argue that fake barn-style cases do NOT counter anything?
You could argue that they are examples of knowledge, although lucky cases of it
What does virtue epistemology define knowledge as?
Knowledge is apt belief - true belief formed by epistemic virtue
Describe Sosa’s AAA model
Accuracy - true belief
Adroitness - belief formed from epistemic virtue
Aptness - belief that is accurate because it is adroit
Who pioneered virtue epistemology?
Sosa
