For thousands of years the most prominent theory of knowledge was Plato’s Justified True Belief theory. He was convinced that in order to know something the following criterion must be met:
a) one must believe said thing to be true
b) said thing must actually be true, and
c) one must be justified in believing said thing to be true.
This theory made a lot of sense to most epistemologists, and was generally accepted as true for a very long time. It wasn’t until a man named Edmund Gettier wrote a paper offering some counterexamples to this theory that philosophers began to dismiss it. Since the publication of Gettier’s paper in 1963, most modern epistemologists have abandoned the justified true belief theory. Gettier’s counterexamples demonstrate that having a justified true belief in something isn’t necessarily equivalent to possessing knowledge. They show that something more than just justified truth is needed. This lead to what is known as the Gettier Problem: what, in addition to (or instead of) justified true belief, is needed to constitute knowledge? The solution to this problem is still being searched for by contemporary philosophers, and no general consensus has been reached. Many other counterexamples to justified true belief theory have been constructed since Gettier’s paper, and these thought experiments are referred to as Gettier Cases. These thought experiments are generally characterized by the presence of a few key elements: justified true belief without
In Plato's Apology, the Oracle at Delphi told Socrates that he was the wisest man (21a-b). Shocked by the statement and disbelieving it, he wanted to find out if it was true. He asked everyone who claimed to have knowledge, and tried to understand the basis of that knowledge. He discovered that nobody actually knew what they thought they knew. Socrates' fundamental moral belief was that nobody would choose to do wrong, if only they knew it was wrong. This is because the wrong harms the person who chooses it, and nobody would choose to harm themselves. Combining these two observations, the unexamined life is one in which people live with the belief that they have knowledge, and then act on this false knowledge in ways that harm themselves (and
In this counterexample of the traditional view of knowledge that Gettier illustrates, a true justified belief evolved from a false justified belief. What the Gettier problem shows us is that in order for a true belief to qualify as knowledge, it must satisfy two conditions; it must not be a lucky guess (that is, it must be justified), and it must not be a lucky truth. A true belief that isn't a lucky guess, it may still be a lucky truth, and thus fall short of being knowledge. So where must knowledge come from?
Personally, I believe that art can provide us knowledge about the world, but the knowledge it provides isn’t always accurate. My take on this question is similar to Plato’s in the belief that everyone has an internal bias, even if they’re unaware of it. My idea also sees validity to Lopes argument that knowledge from art can be misleading. The only argument that I don’t particularly believe in is Goodman’s. Goodman argues that art can provide us knowledge only if it is correctly represented in the eyes of the artist.
Socrates continues the conversation with Glaucon and now focuses on the obligation of the guardians and philosophers to serve the people as a result of their education.
The story of two sisters, Melissa and Melinda, is one of deep philosophical analysis. The harsh scenario is of the two sisters’ brother, Matthew, who is involved in a horrific accident that essentially leaves him brain dead and only alive through a complex network of life support systems. According to Matthew’s last will and testament, he states specifically that if something of this sort ever happens to him, both sisters must mutually agree upon the ultimate decision of whether or not to proverbially “pull the plug.” This is a massive decision that will take great deliberation upon both parties to inevitably come to common terms with one another. Essentially, both sisters have their own aspect of what they should do regarding
Edmund Gettier’s argument that justified true belief is not a sufficient definition for knowledge is correct. There are many scenarios in which the conditions for justified true belief are met but cannot be said to qualify as knowledge; therefore justified true belief is not a sufficient definition for knowledge.
I contend that Plato 's theories on morality are persuaded by concerns he had about moral theory. Specifically, Plato rejects rationality as the boost of subjectively evaluated self-interest because, had he received such an account, his hypothesis of justice would be liable to reactions which he holds are lethal to the contractarian theory of justice. While detailing a hypothesis to stay inside ethical constraints in some cases disregards the groups of scientific theorizing, Plato maintains to avoid this mistake.
19. As Socrates, Plato believed that true virtue is based on knowledge. This knowledge comes from the rational apprehension of the eternal ideas of goodness and justice.
universal truths and pass it on to those who cannot see it. To Plato the above is his
The Gettier Problem is a widely acknowledged philosophical question, named in honour of Edmund Gettier who discovered it in 1963, which questions whether a piece of information that someone believes for invalid reasons, but by mere happenstance is correct, counts as knowledge. Before the Gettier paper was published, it was widely believed that the Tripartite Theory of Knowledge- which states that Justified True Belief equaled knowledge- was fact. This means that with three conditions, one could know something. Firstly, if you believe something, secondly, if you have justification for believing, and thirdly, that your belief is in fact true. If all three of these conditions were met, then this amounted to knowledge. However, with the publication of Gettier’s paper, “Is Justified True Belief Knowledge?”, he attempted to prove, with the aid of a number of problems, that it was not sufficient to have only these three conditions in order for a belief to become knowledge.
Plato argued that true knowledge was not obtained through the knowledge of the physical world around us, but from these unchanging ideas. Plato’s theory of knowledge is well explained through his discussion of the Divided Line; a line divided into two unequal parts. One section represents the visible order and the other intelligible order, relating to opinion and knowledge, respectively. The stages of cognition flow upwards: imagining, belief, thinking, and intelligence. The visible, changing world of opinion begins with the awareness of images through perception. Awareness of images can include
Plato contended that all true knowledge is recollection. He stated that we all have innate knowledge that tells us about the things we experience in our world. This knowledge, Plato believed, was gained when the soul resided in the invisible realm, the realm of The Forms and The Good.
Plato is remembered as one of the worlds best known philosophers who along with his writings are widely studied. Plato was a student of the great Greek philosopher Socrates and later went on to be the teacher of Aristotle. Plato’s writings such as “The Republic”, “Apology” and “Symposium” reveal a great amount of insight on what was central to his worldview. He was a true philosopher as he was constantly searching for wisdom and believed questioning every aspect of life would lead him to the knowledge he sought. He was disgusted with the common occurrence of Greeks not thinking for themselves but simply accepting the popular opinion also known as doxa. Plato believed that we ought to search for and meditate on the ideal versions of beauty, justice, wisdom, and other concepts which he referred to as the forms. His hostility towards doxa, theory of the forms, and perspective on reality were the central ideas that shaped Plato’s worldview and led him to be the great philosopher who is still revered today.
Epistemology is purposed with discovering and studying what knowledge is and how we can classify what we know, how we know it, and provide some type of framework for how we arrived at this conclusion. In the journey to identify what knowledge is the certainty principle was one of the first concepts that I learned that explained how we, as humans, consider ourselves to know something. The certainty concept suggests that knowledge requires evidence that is sufficient to rule out the possibility of error. This concept is exemplified in cases like The Gettier problem in the instance that we suppose (S) someone to know (P) a particular proposition. As Gettier established the Justified True Belief as a conceptual formula for knowledge, certainty
“If the truth of all things always existed in the soul, then the soul is immortal” (The Philosophical Journey 89). This states that since the soul has all knowledge integrated, one recollects this knowledge through situations in an individual’s life and use one’s reasoning. With the dialogues of the Meno and Phaedo, Plato discusses the ideas of recollection and immortality of the soul in general. As well, the Republic, through the three different situations shown, Plato shows the ideas of the forms and what is real and what is not.