10-5
epistemology study of knowledge what is knowledge? how is knowledge acquired? what do we know?
what is knowledge epistemology deals with propositional knowledge (knowing-that) this is contrasted with knowing-how, with practical knowledge must involve belief  makes no sense to say “i know p, but i don’t believe that p” must be true makes no sense to say that “i know p, but p is not true” general definition is that knowledge is justified true belief the issue of justification is complex, and there is some disagreement about what qualifies as such
how do we acquire knowledge rationalism we have knowledge  a priori  by way of innate ideas we use such knowledge to build the rest of our knowledge empiricism we have knowledge  a posteriori  by way of experience
rationalism to be a rationalist is to adopt at least one of three claims the intuition/deduction thesis the innate knowledge thesis the innate concept thesis
intuition/deduction thesis some propositions in a particular subject area, s, are knowable by us by intuition alone; still others are knowable by being deduced from intuited propositions  intuition is a form of rational insight.  it allows us to just “see” the truth of some proposition once we have this piece of knowledge we are able to deduce other pieces of knowledge from it all knowledge gained in this way is  a priori  and gained independently from sense experience examples might be something like mathematics or even metaphysical claims, e.g. free will, God exists, substance dualism
innate knowledge thesis we have knowledge of some truths in a particular subject area, s, as part of our rational nature  knowledge is not the result of intuition or deduction.  it is just part of our nature that we have it. the way we gained this knowledge could be by way of God, natural selection, or some other means
innate concept thesis we have some of the concepts we employ in a particular subject area, s, as part of our rational nature  differs slightly from innate knowledge thesis in that we can deduce knowledge from innate concepts, but are not knowledge as such examples could be perfect geometric shapes, e.g. triangles, squares, etc.
other important notions there are other notions which are important to most rationalists.  although it is not necessary to hold them to qualify as a rationalist, most do. indispensability of reason thesis the knowledge we gain in subject area, s, by intuition and deduction, as well as the ideas and instances of knowledge in s that are innate to us, could not have been gained by us through sense experience  superiority of reason thesis the knowledge we gain in subject area s by intuition and deduction or have innately is superior to any knowledge gained by sense experience
descartes was a rationalist claimed that  a priori  knowledge was superior to  a posteriori  knowledge in that the former is indubitable while the latter is open to error used methodic doubt to get down to what could not be doubted grasped the  cogito  by way of intuition and deduced all other knowledge from this foundation
empiricism claims that we have no source of knowledge in s or for the concepts we use in s other than sense experience knowledge, then, is  a posteriori
locke was an empiricist claimed that notion of innate ideas was problematic in that it does not appear that such ideas are, as claimed by rationalists, universal (i.e. children and the mentally deficient do not have them) claimed that there were only two ways to attain knowledge sensation understanding uses sense impressions to derive sensation; this is a representation of the world reflection the ability to observe within ourselves the actions of our mind
rationalism vs. empiricism it is important to note that there is some overlap in ideas many empiricists agree that we can know propositions concerning relations between our concepts.  that is, some truths are analytic and, hence,  a priori empiricists do not want to say that such intuitive knowledge can be had about the external world
correspondence theory of truth “ truth” can only be a property of a belief.  that is, it makes no sense to talk about whether or not some fact of the matter is true; it is only the  belief  of whether or not something is such that can be true or false a proper theory of truth has three requisites allows truth to have an opposite, namely falsehood makes truth a property of belief makes it a property wholly dependent upon the relation of the beliefs to outside things believing truly occurs when there is a corresponding complex not involving the mind, but only its objects

10-5

  • 1.
  • 2.
    epistemology study ofknowledge what is knowledge? how is knowledge acquired? what do we know?
  • 3.
    what is knowledgeepistemology deals with propositional knowledge (knowing-that) this is contrasted with knowing-how, with practical knowledge must involve belief makes no sense to say “i know p, but i don’t believe that p” must be true makes no sense to say that “i know p, but p is not true” general definition is that knowledge is justified true belief the issue of justification is complex, and there is some disagreement about what qualifies as such
  • 4.
    how do weacquire knowledge rationalism we have knowledge a priori by way of innate ideas we use such knowledge to build the rest of our knowledge empiricism we have knowledge a posteriori by way of experience
  • 5.
    rationalism to bea rationalist is to adopt at least one of three claims the intuition/deduction thesis the innate knowledge thesis the innate concept thesis
  • 6.
    intuition/deduction thesis somepropositions in a particular subject area, s, are knowable by us by intuition alone; still others are knowable by being deduced from intuited propositions intuition is a form of rational insight. it allows us to just “see” the truth of some proposition once we have this piece of knowledge we are able to deduce other pieces of knowledge from it all knowledge gained in this way is a priori and gained independently from sense experience examples might be something like mathematics or even metaphysical claims, e.g. free will, God exists, substance dualism
  • 7.
    innate knowledge thesiswe have knowledge of some truths in a particular subject area, s, as part of our rational nature knowledge is not the result of intuition or deduction. it is just part of our nature that we have it. the way we gained this knowledge could be by way of God, natural selection, or some other means
  • 8.
    innate concept thesiswe have some of the concepts we employ in a particular subject area, s, as part of our rational nature differs slightly from innate knowledge thesis in that we can deduce knowledge from innate concepts, but are not knowledge as such examples could be perfect geometric shapes, e.g. triangles, squares, etc.
  • 9.
    other important notionsthere are other notions which are important to most rationalists. although it is not necessary to hold them to qualify as a rationalist, most do. indispensability of reason thesis the knowledge we gain in subject area, s, by intuition and deduction, as well as the ideas and instances of knowledge in s that are innate to us, could not have been gained by us through sense experience superiority of reason thesis the knowledge we gain in subject area s by intuition and deduction or have innately is superior to any knowledge gained by sense experience
  • 10.
    descartes was arationalist claimed that a priori knowledge was superior to a posteriori knowledge in that the former is indubitable while the latter is open to error used methodic doubt to get down to what could not be doubted grasped the cogito by way of intuition and deduced all other knowledge from this foundation
  • 11.
    empiricism claims thatwe have no source of knowledge in s or for the concepts we use in s other than sense experience knowledge, then, is a posteriori
  • 12.
    locke was anempiricist claimed that notion of innate ideas was problematic in that it does not appear that such ideas are, as claimed by rationalists, universal (i.e. children and the mentally deficient do not have them) claimed that there were only two ways to attain knowledge sensation understanding uses sense impressions to derive sensation; this is a representation of the world reflection the ability to observe within ourselves the actions of our mind
  • 13.
    rationalism vs. empiricismit is important to note that there is some overlap in ideas many empiricists agree that we can know propositions concerning relations between our concepts. that is, some truths are analytic and, hence, a priori empiricists do not want to say that such intuitive knowledge can be had about the external world
  • 14.
    correspondence theory oftruth “ truth” can only be a property of a belief. that is, it makes no sense to talk about whether or not some fact of the matter is true; it is only the belief of whether or not something is such that can be true or false a proper theory of truth has three requisites allows truth to have an opposite, namely falsehood makes truth a property of belief makes it a property wholly dependent upon the relation of the beliefs to outside things believing truly occurs when there is a corresponding complex not involving the mind, but only its objects