Ethos, Epistemology, Logic, Ontology, And Concept Of Self

Ethos, Epistemology, Logic, Ontology, And Concept Of Self
"Culture comprises traditional ideas and related values, and it is the product of actions" (Kroeber
and Kluckhohn, 1952); "it is learned, shared, and transmitted from one generation to the next
(Linton, 1945); and it organizes life and helps interpret existence" (Gordon, 1964).
Within each culture, paradigms exist. Paradigms determine what we perceive and experience as real.
Cultures are different due to paradigms. There are eight culture dimensions, which are:
Psychobehavioral modality, Axiology, Ethos, Epistemology, Logic, Ontology, Concept of time and
Concept of self. Psychobehavioral modality refers to the mode of activity most preferred within a
culture. Axiology involves the interpersonal values that a culture teaches. Ethos refers to ... Show
more content on Helpwriting.net ...
Racism is "the systematic subordination of members of targeted racial groups who have relatively
little social power ... by members of the gent racial group who have relatively more social power"
(Wijeyesinghe, Griffin, and Love, 1997, Pg. 58). Prejudice is defined as an "antipathy; that is, a
negative feeling, either expressed or not expressed, based upon a faulty and inflexible generalization
which places (a group of people) at some disadvantage not merited by their actions (Allport, 1954,
Pg. 58). According to the text, individual racism refers to "the beliefs, attitudes, and actions of
individuals that support or perpetuate racism." Institutional racism "involves the manipulation of
societal institutions to give preferences and advantages to Whites and at the same time restrict the
choice, rights, mobility, and access of people of color." Cultural racism is "the belief that the cultural
ways of one group are superior to those of another." Each type of racism will exist forever. The
authority and power of racism is strong since it's been around for decades. Racism, whether obvious
or subtle, will continue to prevent diverse people from having a successful interaction and
... Get more on HelpWriting.net ...

Analysis Of The Article ' Racialized Discourses And Ethnic...
For this week's reading, we read the article "Racialized Discourses and Ethnic Epistemologies" by
Gloria Ladson–Billings. The main purpose of this reading is to argue that "there are well–developed
system of knowledge, or epistemologies, that stand in contrast to the dominant Euro–American
epistemology." (Denzin and Lincoln P. 399) The author started out the article by arguing the
importance of national and racial consciousness. Author Billings pointed out that the Europeans
view that the individual's mind is the origin of knowledge and presence. On the other hand, the
African word "Ubuntu" means "I am because we are." This shows that the African thinks that the
idea of humanity is very important and everyone should be treated fairly no matter what racial and
ethnic background they are from. These two ideas came out in the mid to late 1960's, the two
different point of views clear choice between hegemony and liberation. Comparing these two
various perspectives shows that this is a critical case. Moving on, the author explained that the
concept of epistemology is a "system of knowing" instead of simply "way of knowing".
Epistemology include both inner logic and outer validity. Author Billings explained this by
describing the difference between "literature" and "folklore". The literatures written by the
minorities are very likely to be identified as the "folklore" category as they are always seen to be
less talented than the whites, and the society naturally downgrade their

Kant Analysis
However, there seems to be a foundational flaw in Kant's logic that he uses to justify synthetic a
priori statements, like the ones from above, that defeat the argument. The issue sprouts from how to
think about a term's definition. Being true by definition is a quality of a priori knowledge and also
analytic statements, but Kant, in a sense, is attempting to argue that not all things true by definition
are analytic knowledge. Consider what a definition really is, where it originated, and how it was
derived. A definition of a word describes it in detail and was created, whether it was your own
personal spin on a term's definition a basic dictionary explanation that someone at some point
crafted, definitions are all subjectively man–made. Looking ... Show more content on
Helpwriting.net ...
As we explained before, basic math is always a priori since it is able to be derived with reason alone
without the need of sensory experience. The argument for simple addition being a type of synthetic
statement in this context seems to be justified because new information, the addition of five, is being
used to derive a new concept, the number twelve, from another concept, the number seven. By
making a further observation to this, there are areas that do not seem consistent with the usual
justification of a synthetic statement. For something to be a synthetic statement, you must derive a
new attribute to a concept by getting information from somewhere outside of the concept itself. At
first glance, it seems as though this was accomplished, but taking a closer look you would realize
that the number twelve is not an extension of the number seven. Twelve says nothing about seven, it
is an entirely new standalone concept, although it is derived from seven, it is not a feature of seven
and provides no new information about it. The closest possible rebuttal one may argue is to say that
twelve, in this context, delivers information about what happens to seven when one is to add five to
it. It does not feel strong enough to close the case, considering that twelve is still a whole separate
entity from seven, but even if that

Philosophy : The Lorax By Dr. Seuss
PHILOSOPHY CCA–Brandon Campos
Philosophy translates literally into "love for wisdom". This "wisdom" is categorized into 6
disciplines; Logic and Reason, Metaphysics, Epistemology, Aesthetics, Social and Political
Philosophy and Philosophy of Science. Throughout our course we focused on Metaphysics,
Aesthetics, Epistemology and Logic and Reason. My selected children's story book is The Lorax by
Dr. Seuss. The book does show strong signs of Epistemology, Logic and Reason and its pictures
display some theories we learned in our aesthetics unit. Knowledge and perception are apparent
along with Representationism throughout the plot.
The Lorax begins in a ruined and polluted town. A curious unnamed boy wanders to the old Oncler
factory looking ... Show more content on Helpwriting.net ...
However, it is best suited for children and adolescents. Due to the fact that The Lorax is a children's
book, the concepts and ideas presented within the book are clear and simple, and are easy to
reminisce with. The Lorax strongly displays signs of Ethics and Epistemology, with Aesthetics
relevant in the pictures of the book and Metaphysics being weakly hinted at.
First of all, Ethics and Epistemology are very present throughout the plot of the story. The concepts
of knowledge, perceptions, opinions and morality are presented through the characters of Mr. Oncler
and the Lorax. An example is when the narrator of the story said, "some people say, if you look deep
enough you can still see, today, where the Lorax once stood, just as long as it could, before
somebody lifted the Lorax away." (PG 2) This relates to epistemology the quote represents a belief
or folklore. Epistemology is a unit which focuses itself on knowledge and finding the "truth" to
questions. Finding that truth all depends on making logical and valid claims. What is difficult is that
majority of those claims are beliefs, and cannot be definitely proven, and require trust to believe
them. This is because beliefs are subjective, which means that it is something based on or influenced
by personal feelings, tastes, or opinions.
Secondly, Perception and truth are relevant in discussing Mr. Oncler's thinking

Kant, Second Analogy,and Causation
Kant, Second Analogy, and Causation
Introduction In the critique of pure reason, Kant states, "All alternations occur in accordance with
the law of the connection of cause and effect."1 This statement is interpreted in two different ways:
weak readings and strong readings. The weak readings basically suggest that Kant's statement only
refer to "All events have a cause"; however, the strong readings suggest that "the Second Analogy is
committed not just to causes, but to causal laws as well."2 To understand the difference between the
readings, it is helpful to notice Kant's distinction between empirical laws of nature and universal
transcendental principles. Empirical laws have an empirical element that universal transcendental
principles cannot imply. On the other hand, empirical experiences require necessity to become a law,
accordingly, "the transcendental laws "ground" the empirical laws by supplying them with their
necessity."3In this paper, according to this distinction, I first, argue that the second analogy supports
the weak reading, second, show how in Prolegomena he uses the concept of causation in a way that
is compatible to the strong reading, and third, investigate whether this incongruity is solvable.
The Second Analogy In the Critique of Pure Reason, Kant argues that there is a necessary condition
for representing and knowing objective succession, namely causality. In B 233–234 he introduces
his argument as follows:
"I perceive that appearances succeed

Phil 201 Study Guide Lesson 10 Essay
Study Guide: Lesson 10
What is Knowledge?
Lesson Overview
With this lesson, we begin a new unit on epistemology, which is the philosophical study of
knowledge claims. In this first lesson on epistemology, we begin by examining the question "What
do we mean when we say we know something?" What exactly is knowledge? We will begin with a
presentation that introduces the traditional definition of knowledge. Wood then discusses some of
the basic issues raised in the study of epistemology and then presents an approach to epistemology
that focuses on obtaining the intellectual virtues, a point we will elaborate on in the next lesson.
Tasks
View and take notes of the presentation, "What is Knowledge?" * Describe the 3 different ... Show
–––WE ACHIEVE EXCELLENCE IN THE INTELLECTUAL LIFE, ACCORDING TO THIS
TRADITION, WHEN WE FORM WITHIN OURSELVES QUALITIES LIKE WISDOM,
PRUDENCE, UNDERSTANDING, INTELLECTUAL HUMILITY, LOVEOF TRUTH AND
SIMILAR TRAITS–––SOME BELIEFS ARE TREMENDOUSLY IMPORTANT IN SHAPING
OUR LIVES AND GUIDING OUR BEHAVIOR/CHARACTER IS AT STAKE * 19 Explain the
biblical support for cultivating intellectual virtues. ROMANS 12:3, EPH. 4:14, 2 TIMOTHY 4:3–4
* 20–21 List 5 parallels between moral and intellectual virtues. –––Cultivating the virtues is a
developmental process extending through a lifetime/ Growth in the virtues is not automatic/ We are
not alone on our efforts to become morally and intellectually virtuous people/ our careers as a moral
and intellectual agents are enveloped in a community context/ We must work to sustain our gains in
the moral and intellectual life, since regression is a real possibility/ Growing in intellectual virtue
requires that we grow in moral virtues, and vice versa.––– * 24 What are 2 misdiagnosis of the
reason for Mark Studdock's failure? 1. SOMETIMES WE FAIL TO SECURE THE TRUTH
BECAUSE OF SOME KIND OF PHYSIOLOGICAL MALFUNCTION 2. "THE WISE MAN
OUGHT TO PROPORTION HIS BELIEF TO THE EVIDENCE" * 25, 28, 29, 30 What are the 4
areas in which virtue epistemology excels and traditional epistemology is lacking in considering the
formation of our beliefs in (as is exemplified in the story of Mark Studdock)?

The Feminist Philosophy Of Science Essay
Feminist interaction with the philosophy of science, and in particular a feminist interpretation of
epistemology, concerns the extent to which bias influences and shapes knowledge within the
scientific community, and means to rectify this. There are three main distinctions of feminist
philosophy of science – feminist empiricism, standpoint theory, and postmodernism. I am to be
comparing and contrasting two of the three, specifically feminist standpoint theory and empiricism.
I shall argue that standpoint theory and empiricism are both legitimate methods for feminist
epistemology, yet standpoint theory is a more applicable and plausible method for the analysis of
science in particular. I will first explain the main tenets of the feminist philosophy of science, going
on to then explain reasons why standpoint theory and postmodernism are legitimate tools of analysis
in their own right, and then evaluate their legitimacy.
The feminist philosophy of science studies and analyses discourse and knowledge that is harmful
and not conducive to attaining an impartial interpretation of science, with a view to critically
examining science and the scientific method. It identifies how gender bias can (and does) affect the
scientific community and the consequences of this bias (Anderson, 2000). The three main variants
are feminist empiricism, feminist standpoint theory and feminist postmodernism. Feminist
empiricism holds that there is a real, objective, knowable world. Furthermore,

David Hume's Theory of Causality Essay
What Came First: The Chicken or the Egg? David Hume moves through a logical progression of the
ideas behind cause and effect. He critically analyzes the reasons behind those generally accepted
ideas. Though the relation of cause and effect seems to be completely logical and based on common
sense, he discusses our impressions and ideas and why they are believed. Hume's progression,
starting with his initial definition of cause, to his final conclusion in his doctrine on causality. As a
result, it proves how Hume's argument on causality follows the same path as his epistemology, with
the two ideas complimenting each other so that it is rationally impossible to accept the epistemology
and not accept his argument on causality. Hume starts by ... Show more content on Helpwriting.net
...
That argument contradicts itself, because it uses itself as a cause for existence in its premise, when it
is proving the concept of cause being a necessity. Therefore, it begs the question to prove cause and
effect by relying on the conclusion to prove the premise. The ideas of cause and effect cannot vary
too far from actual impressions of the mind or ideas from the memory. We must first establish the
existence of causes before we can infer effects from them. We have only two ways of doing that,
either by an immediate perception of our memory or senses, called impressions, or, by an inference
from other causes, called thoughts. For example, "A man finding a watch or any other machine in a
desert island would conclude that there had once been men in that island" (160). Regardless of the
source of the impression, the imagination and perceptions of the senses are the foundation for the
reasoning that traces the relation of cause and effect. The inference that we draw from cause to
effect does not come from a dependence on the two concepts to each other or from a rational
objective look at the two. One object does not imply the existence of any other. All distinct ideas are
separable, as are the ideas of cause and effect. The only way that we can infer the existence of one
object from another is through experience. Contiguity and succession are not sufficient to make us
pronounce any two objects to be cause and effect, unless we

The Concept Of Knowledge As Justified True Belief Is...
For a lengthy period of time in philosophy the concept of knowledge as justified true belief was
accepted without too much debate. The Gettier problem is an issue which assails the long held idea
of knowledge as justified true belief, it is the result of a small but definite gap between the concepts
of justification and truth. By revamping the concept of justification the defeasibility account is able
to correct some Gettier cases by narrowing the gap between knowledge and truth, but ultimately still
fails to solve the problem. The Gettier problem arose as the result of problematic cases in which
subjects possessed all three of the necessary conditions for knowledge, yet did not appear to be in
possession of it. In these cases subjects, despite possessing all of the conditions, appeared to have
nothing more significant than luck that allowed them to be in possession of truth, not any form of
concrete knowledge. I will break down two of the classic Gettier examples in order to help illustrate
the issue: The first example is that in which there are two people Jones and Smith, who are both up
for a job promotion. Jones is told by the boss who will be doing the hiring that Smith is going to get
the job. Next by coincidence Jones is with Smith when he takes all the coins out of his pocket and
counts them. Smith counts that he has ten coins in his pocket. From here Jones, starting with his
original belief that Smith will get the job, deduces a second belief that the man who

Descartes' Epistemology
Epistemology
–––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––
Carefully explain Descartes' cogito and his attempt to build his knowledge structure from the
ground up. (Be as succinct as possible.) Does Descartes succeed or fail in that attempt? Justify your
answer in full.
Descartes' Epistemology
This essay attempts to explain Descartes' epistemology of his knowledge, his "Cogito, Ergo Sum"
concept (found in the Meditations), and why he used it [the cogito concept] as a foundation when
building his structure of knowledge. After explaining the concept I give a brief evaluation of his
success in introducing and using this cogito as a foundation. Finally, I provide reasons why I think
Descartes succeeded in his epistemology.
The First ... Show more content on Helpwriting.net ...
The argument, as Descartes presented, does not give a valid reason for the existence of the body or
anything else in the physical world, so we cannot accept that bodies exist. Neither does the cogito
account for the existence of other minds as that would entail knowledge of the physical world where
other things exist. The cogito concept does however; give a valid argument for the existence of the
mind or a thinking thing that exists independently of the body. In his novel Think, Blackburn
explains the cogito concept as a means of justifying the core of one's existence as thinking, we
accept that thought exists not a 'self' (Blackburn, 2001:20). I agree with Blackburn because his
[Descartes'] concept serves well to prove that we exist as thinking things and even if we were to
discard any a priori or a posteriori knowledge, we can still endorse the cogito. The cogito concept
stands regardless of empirical knowledge because it suggests the existence of thought without
actually linking it to the body (which constitutes a sort of empirical way of acquiring knowledge
through the senses). In addition, it can be accepted without any a priori knowledge since Descartes
only introduced it after concluding that he knew nothing, and could only accept knowledge of his
own existence as vindicated.
To assess Descartes choice of foundation I will raise some questions that implore an explanation
regarding the

Explain Some Of The Benefits A Student May Gain By...
Module 1 Reading/Discussion Questions Chapter 1 1. Explain some of the benefits a student may
gain by studying philosophy. A student may gain several benefits from studying philosophy. For
instance, students may learn how to evaluate arguments, analyze ideas and draw individual
conclusions. Philosophy teaches how to make judgements with precise evaluation based on ethics
and morality, taking under consideration all the factors that make an evaluation precise. This is
useful because one must have the capacity to analyze situations and develop a solution in the
tribulations of life. Hence, studying philosophy is beneficial regardless of major. 2. Explain the
Socratic Method of Teaching. Is this a useful way for students to learn? The Socratic Method of
Teaching develops critical thinking. It involves examination, analysis, evaluation, and a
combination of thoughts and ideas. This is with the purpose to bring questions into sharper focus
and provide a foundation for the answers. It is a useful way for students to learn because some
situations in life will require careful analysis and evaluation in order to make an executive decision,
and the Socratic Method of Teaching provides the tools to do so. 3. Explain how critical thinking
can be used to analyze a philosophical issue. In the book, critical thinking is defined as the
engagement of a thinker in rational deliberation, investigation of facts and reasons, and the
evaluation of arguments. By employing rational thinking, one is

Euthyphro Piety Research Paper
Plato was one of the most influential author in the history of philosophy. He raised profound
questions that no other person had ever done before. He created new thinking on ethics, politics,
metaphysical, and epistemological. He made an impact on how to think about philosophy. Immanuel
Kant was a modern philosopher. His work explores the topics of metaphysics, epistemology, ethics,
aesthetics, and the immortal soul. His work also made a change in the philosophy field to this day.
The works of Plato and Immanuel Kant will be explored. The similarities and the differences
between the two philosophers will also be explored. By the end of this paper, you will be informed
and enlighten about two of the most influential philosophers in the history ... Show more content on
Helpwriting.net ...
The allegory of the cave sums up the worldview of Plato. The prisoners in the cave represent the
individuals who are fooled by the images they think are real. The man that is freed by the chains is
the true philosopher who uses intellect to see the real world. For Plato the true philosopher is the
right person to rule the world. A true philosopher is the only true person who can gain knowledge.
The philosophers who were not corrupted or manipulated along the way have the just mind and are
the only ones capable of gaining any

Reflection Paper On Feminism
Reflection Paper #2 When someone thinks of Feminism and Science, they might immediately think
that the two fields are incompatible and do not go with each other, or they may think that the two
fields mixing are problematic. Peter Godfrey–Smith only contends with what is called "spontaneous
feminist empiricism" (Godfrey–Smith 141), and somewhat contend with "philosophical feminist
empiricism" (Godfrey–Smith 141). Many scientists and people like Godfrey–Smith would
immediately gravitate towards these two types of feminism in science. As to why, it is because they
do not completely challenge any of the established and well–regarded theories, ideas, or paradigms
that exist within science, and avoid relativism. Instead, those two types of feminism critiques of
science, only take a feminist point of view to examine biases and anything else within scientific
work. However, the type of feminism that needs to be embraced, at least within science, should be
"radical feminist epistemology" (Godfrey–Smith 141). Within radical feminist epistemology,
"feminist postmodernism" (Godfrey–Smith 141) and "standpoint epistemology" (Godfrey–Smith
141) argue that everyone, especially oppressed groups view the world differently, and that the ideal
of a single truth existing in the world is an illusion, as well as that the "situatedness" (Godfrey–
Smith 141) of someone (their location, age, status) is extremely important in how science is
conducted. Overall, however, both types of radical

Modest Standpoint Epistemology: What Is Strong Objectivity?
In "Modest_Witness@Second_Millenium," Donna Haraway profiles the "modest witness" of
science, a self–invisible inhabitant of an unmarked category who is authorized to establish facts
about the world without his own embodiment clouding or biasing the world's objective truth. "His
subjectivity is his objectivity" (24). Historically, his objectivity has been contrasted with the
subjectivity and special interests of women and people of color, among other marginalized people.
Thus, they have always been excluded from science and used as determinants of what can and
cannot count as knowledge, of scientific fact and popular culture (28–30). Feminist epistemologists
such as Haraway call the (lack of) subjectivity of this modest witness into question ... Show more
content on Helpwriting.net ...
Standpoint theory argues that some subjectivities are scientifically better than others for the basis of
knowledge claims, combating critiques that standpoints are relativist (61). Harding also explores
why the subjects of standpoint theory are preferable to those of empiricism. Firstly, in standpoint
theory, she claims, subjectivities are "embodied and visible" because subjects' lives, the bases of
thought, are present in the results of their thought (63). Secondly, communities and not individuals
produce knowledge; a standpoint is collective (65). Thirdly, subjectivities are "multiple,
heterogeneous, contradictory, and incoherent," with knowledge coming from many different
women's lives (65). Lastly, Harding places the subject on the same plane as the object. She asserts
that when subjects are socially located, it is apparent that they are not fundamentally different from
objects of knowledge (64). According to Haraway, in order to maximize objectivity, subjects must
undergo the same "critical, causal–scientific!–social explanations" as the objects of knowledge (71).
This locates both in history, critically investigates any biases or distortions, and gives a strongly
objective voice to traditionally marginalized groups through a clearly identified and accountable

Comparing Plato 's Theaetetus, The Dialog Between Socrates...
Knowledge Defined as Justified True Belief
In Plato's Theaetetus, the dialog between Socrates and his student, Theaetetus, sets up the argument
that knowledge is true belief that is adequately justified. Although there are many examples that
prove Plato's suggestion, people such as Edmund Gettier have questioned and disproved the notion
of knowledge as justified true belief. In response to Gettier's findings, many have tried to modify or
find an alternative to the Justified True Belief model in search for the true definition of knowledge.
In this paper, I will outline and discuss Plato's Justified True Belief argument, outline and discuss
Gettier's response to Plato's argument, and lastly, present and analyze four solutions to the Gettier
problems.
1. Plato's Justified True Belief
In Plato's Theaetetus, Socrates starts his discussion by asking Theaetetus to define the word
knowledge. In response to Socrates' question, Theaetetus responds by saying, "geometry...cobblery,
and other craftsmen's arts...are nothing else but knowledge" (Plato, 2). Though true, Plato is not
satisfied with Theaetetus' definition of knowledge because it fails to address the core meaning of the
word. Plato is interested in understanding the definition of knowledge through conceptual analysis–
understanding the minimum requirements for one to have knowledge, and avoiding circularity in
definitions. In order to define knowledge through conceptual analysis, Socrates and Plato outline the
argument as

Stevenson's Argument Essay
The underlying truth behind the existence of humanity is yet to be explained. The field of
philosophy concerns itself with trying to offer an astute explanation to understanding the human
existence as well as human nature. Yet, there is a blatant irony in humans trying to propose the
reasoning behind their own existence. Are humans capable of providing justification of their own
existence? Philosophers try to establish a concrete validation of these questions by using concepts of
existence, epistemology, and morality. However, not all philosophical schools of thought seamlessly
blend together in using these concepts.
Each philosopher possesses an intricate intellect that gains support from other philosophers as well
as their own ... Show more content on Helpwriting.net ...
Hobbes' stark rejection of Plato and Aristotle further justify the importance of the tripartite
connection because Hobbes fails to establish a concrete explanation of human nature. For example,
it can be seen in his explanation for the causes of quarrel, "First, competition; secondly, diffidence;
third, glory" (Human Nature 95). This is based on a sensory concept of cause and effect–not true
knowledge (epistemology). It delves more into the interactions between humans rather than an
explanation of what does it mean to exist. He asserts that all humans are selfish, but does not
provide rationale on why humans are selfish because being human has more depth than just
selfishness and survival (Human Nature 96). Hume is similar to Hobbes, but his philosophy is
focused on empiricism–just the facts unlike Plato. Namely, Hume uses aspects of epistemology to
emphasis existence and

Kill A Mockingbird Essays: The Importance Of Common Sense
Common Sense If the term common sense were to be looked up in the dictionary, the definition
would state the ability to think and behave in a reasonable way as well as make good decisions. This
raises a lot of questions and diversity in society due to the question; how does one gain common
sense? I believe it is a blind instinct, which cannot be studied; it is a second nature that expands
throughout the stages of life. Common sense is something that starts affecting your life at an early
age, while growing through the different stages from infant through childhood the level of common
sense will enhance. Think about an infant, crawling around on the floor wanting to exit the room but
cannot figure out how to push the door open. As the infant's brain grows into its youth, he or she
will learn the correct way to get through the door. While a toddler for instance already has that sense
and knowledge of how to open the door. This will happen frequently throughout life, it's a part of
the different growing stages. The blind instinct becomes more useful as the child grows into its
youthfulness. ... Show more content on Helpwriting.net ...
It is understood by many members of society that common sense is not taught in an elementary
school, or in a book, or any lesson plan found online and on television. However, I believe it is
utilized to complete daily activities such as hygiene and safety awareness. For instance, babies often
times gravitate toward bright colors such as fire or active moment like smoke. They are unaware of
the hazards that come along with something so colorful and active. Unlike a child or teenager who
would instinctively know the dangers of fire an infant does not have that sense yet to understand the
severity of

Naturalized Epistemology Essays
Epistemology can be divided into two parts: one being traditional epistemology and the other being
naturalized epistemology. The difference between the two is that traditionalists simply accept what
they think they know whereas naturalists put what they think they know to empirical tests. When I
say empirical, I mean methodologies of the natural science. In other words meaning putting things
we think we know to practical tests to find out if it is true, scientifically. Or to even better
understand what I mean by empirical, it is essentially another way of saying naturalized
epistemology. In this essay I will establish the reasons why naturalized epistemology is a better
choice over traditional epistemology. Firstly I will establish how ... Show more content on
Helpwriting.net ...
The problem with this is that theoretical paradigms have no common basis; hence, paradigm–shifts
cannot work out. Special Relativity and Newtonian Mechanics may seem to have the same
theoretical term meaning but they don't because the terms of 'mass', 'force', and 'duration' all have a
different meaning to different scientists. Science in Kuhn's opinion and from what we gather on
theoretical paradigms does not provide a concrete empirical assumption on epistemology. It does not
work best empirically because matters dealing with science must happen with theoretical paradigms,
whose effectiveness is an issue. As I have mentioned, epistemology done empirically is better
known as naturalized epistemology. However, traditional epistemology, otherwise seen as
normative, can help us understand philosophy. When I say normative, I mean the matters of
rationality and justification. Jaegwon Kim describes this form of normative epistemology in his
essay, What is 'Naturalized Epistemology'? where he comments, "that justification is a central
concept of our epistemological tradition, that justification, as it is understood in this tradition, is a
normative normative concept, and in consequence that epistemology itself is a normative inquiry
whose principal aim is a systematic study of the conditions of justified belief." (Kim 539)
Epistemology can be seen as a normative discipline as we see with rationality and the concept of
Davidson's claim on

Epistemology : What Conditions Are Necessary And...
One of the two central questions in epistemology is what conditions are necessary and sufficient for
propositional knowledge? Propositional knowledge is the knowledge that such–and–such is the case
different from knowing someone or knowing how to do something.
A very old and extremely natural account is that belief, truth, and justification are individually and
jointly necessary and jointly sufficient for knowledge; this account is known as justified–truth–
belief (JTB) analysis of knowledge. This means that 'S knows that p' if and only if (a) 'S beliefs that
p', (b) 'p is true', and 'S is justified in believing that p'.
Let's consider that I know that today is Thursday, regarding (a), if it's true that I know today is
Thursday, it follows that I believe today is Thursday. If I didn't believe today is Thursday (for
whatever reason), I wouldn't want to say that I know today is Thursday. Regarding (b), if it's true
that I know today is Thursday, it follows that today is Thursday. If I believe today is Thursday but it
isn't Thursday, then I don't know that today is Thursday (even if I have all kinds of evidence that
today is Thursday). Regarding (c), if it's true that I know today is Thursday, it follows that I have
justification for believing that today is Thursday. If I believe that today is Thursday and it is
Thursday, but I have no good reason to believe that today is Thursday, then I don't know that today
is Thursday. Exactly what it is for a belief to be justified is

Epistemology Is A Better Choice Over Traditional Epistemology
Epistemology can be split into two areas: one being traditional epistemology and the other being
naturalized epistemology. The distinction between the two forms of epistemology is that traditional
epistemologists accept what they think they know whereas natural epistemologists put what they
think they know to empirical tests. The connotation of 'empirical' in this context refers to the
methodologies of natural science; specifically, putting theories that we believe to know to scientific
experimentation to find out if the theory is true. In this essay, I will establish the reasons why
naturalized epistemology is a better choice over traditional epistemology.
First, I will establish why traditional epistemology can be a potentially viable ... Show more content
on Helpwriting.net ...
A paradigm–shift is where a set of theoretical principles is replaced by another, for example: Special
Relativity replaced Newtonian Mechanics. The problem with this is that theoretical paradigms have
no common basis; hence, paradigm–shifts cannot work. Special Relativity and Newtonian
Mechanics may seem to have the same theoretical meaning, but they do not because the terms of
'mass', 'force', and 'duration' all have a different meaning to different scientists. Science, in Kuhn's
opinion and from what is gathered on theoretical paradigms, does not provide concrete, epistemic,
nor empirical assumptions. It does not work best empirically because matters dealing with science
must happen with theoretical paradigms, where effectiveness is a problem. Epistemic thought
executed in an empirical manner is better known as naturalized epistemology. Although, traditional
epistemology, or sometimes referred to as normative epistemology, can help us further our
understanding of philosophy. Jaegwon Kim expounds on this type of epistemology in his work,
What is "Naturalized Epistemology"?, in which he states "that justification is a central concept of
our epistemological tradition, that justification, as it is understood in this tradition, is a normative
concept, and in consequence that epistemology itself is a normative inquiry whose principal aim is a
systematic study of the conditions of justified belief" (Kim, 539). Epistemology can be

Objectivity And Standpoint Epistemology
Throughout the history of epistemology, we are baffled by the haunting spectre of objectifying our
knowledge claims to attain certitude in our knowledge systems. There are different systems in
accordance with our different times and we are always in the drive to dispute those who have come
before us. However, the main question is what does it mean to be objective? Philosophers have
always anchored the perspective of objectivity along the lines of truth––– the allegiance of our
claims to the reality of the world. Others have anchored it on the opposite of subjectivity which is
the knowledge away from personal biases and conditionings. Standpoint epistemology brings forth
its attempt to break or permeate this barrier between our objectivity and ... Show more content on
Helpwriting.net ...
I, for one, believe that my discipline is in itself socialized in that our primary method is in
ethnography and interview method. Our data is primarily gathered through immersion to societies
and key individuals. However, the thing that I think we lack is the analysis of the data and the texts
that these societies have. I believe the discourse analysis can bring us closer to understanding the
people through the ways their language function in structuring their thoughts and actions and the
ways they interact with people lying outside the contexts of their own

Is Knowledge Relative Because Epistemic Intuitions Vary?
Is knowledge relative because epistemic intuitions vary?
In a paper entitled Normativity and Epistemic Intuitions, Weinberg, Nichols and Stich (who I will
hereafter refer to as WNS) have proposed a challenge for the "normative project" (WNS 2001: 2) of
epistemology, a project which involves taking an analytic perspective on epistemology and thereby
setting norms for how to pursue knowledge. One knowledge–forming processes that the this project
is based on, as WNS point out, our "epistemic intuitions" (WNS 2001: 5), and it is from these
intuitions that we may work out a normative account of epistemology. The problem, as WNS state,
is that if groups of people other than those that generally write about epistemology have different ...
Show more content on Helpwriting.net ...
Unless the relativist could somehow distinguish communitarian factors affecting the status of
something as knowledge, and the endorsement of a village elder as a factor affecting the status of
something as knowledge, the relativist would have to admit that the sorts of things that could be
considered within the same sense of "knowledge" can possibly be applied to anything merely
depending on the epistemological education that people have been exposed to. Indeed, the
"universal core to "folk epistemology"" that WNS believe their results show in response to the
"special feeling" case is limited to the environment where WNS have conducted their studies and
cannot be suggested to be universal.
It seems that it would be more reasonable to conclude in such a case that knowledge is being used in
different senses, as Sosa does. He proposes that the sort of status that the East Asians believe to be
more valuable for a belief is one concerned with communitarian factors, whereas Westerners do not
really consider these factors. (Sosa 2005: 14) Thus he argues that when asked in the experiments
whether the subjects of these questions really know, he argues that the answers are in response to
different propositions, as some people may answer the question with one sense of knowledge in
mind (one that takes communitarian factors into account), whereas another would not. To conflate
the two and assert that there was only one sense of knowledge would be to exploit an

Importance Of A Priori Knowledge, Its Methods For...
On the Nature of A Priori Knowledge, its methods for Justification and the Apriority of Mathematics
Steven Umbrello
Table of Contents
Introduction 3 The Token Forms of Apriority 3 The Objections to A Priori Knowledge 4 Putnam's
Contextual Apriority 6 The Necessity of Mathematical Apriority 8 Discussion 9 Conclusion 9 Works
Cited 11
This short paper will evaluate whether or not a priori knowledge is possible. The questions
regarding the objections to the possibility of a priori knowledge are discussed, as are the possible
resolutions to such objections with a focus on Hilary Putnam's theory of contextual apriority. The
nature of apriority in mathematics will also be examined and its possible absolute a priori status. A
short deliberation regarding whether or not apriority obtains will conclude this paper, but before
these are discussed the meaning of a priori knowledge must be considered.
The Token Forms of Apriority A priori knowledge is generally understood as knowledge that is
independent of our experience with it. Unlike a posteriori knowledge that requires experience to
justify it, a priori knowledge can be referred to as 'armchair knowledge, such that one need not
remove himself from his seat to attain said knowledge. 'All bachelors are unmarried men' illustrates
a token form of a priori knowledge, that being analytic. One can easily see that the knowledge

Space Is A Priori Intuition Of Transcendental Ideality
In defining space, the largest question Kant had to wrestle with was whether space was a property of
objects or a condition set in mental faculty. In order to determine this, space needed to be
established as it stands as knowledge. Kant defines space as a priori intuition of transcendental
ideality.
Kant demonstrates that our sense of space cannot come from experience. When one perceives an
object they relate the sensations that coordinate to that object a place. For example, one gets the
sensation of the color of an apple and coordinates that color to the apple and the space that the apple
occupies, in order for the apple to be red. The color red corresponds to the apple while the color of
the table it is resting on coordinates to the table, keeping to two distinct positions in space. In order
for an individual to relate an object as outside of them, they must assign them to a place. If this is
the case, then space is a necessary base to one's perception of an object. So one cannot gain the
intuition of space empirically as space is necessary to one's experience of the external world in order
to have sensibility, or the faculty to passively know objects through sensation. Space is a condition
of the perception of objects rather than a property of the objects themselves so there cannot be a
perception of the objects without space. "It is impossible to have a representation of there being no
space, though one can very well think of space without objects to fill it." (B39

Epistemological Concerns In Ethnographic Research
The key finding of this review suggest that quality end of life is multifaceted. Dying well is
associated with ensuring that the autonomy of the patient is respected, that the healthcare team has
clear and concise communication to avoid miscommunications and along with flexibility of care.
With regards to this topic, the epistemological concerns are one of true relevance. Epistemology is
defined as "justification of knowledge" (Carter & Little, 2007, p. 1317). Since epistemology
inquires where the foundations that knowledge comes from as well as the assumptions that
knowledge is built upon. Furthermore, it is important to understand where the researcher's
knowledge comes from. Epistemological concerns are important to the key findings of this review
since it is to give a perspective on what gives us knowledge. Within the results that were synthesized
it is important to understand that basis of knowledge resulted from witnessing death creates a
difficult topic to research and gain further understanding about (Carter & Little, 2007). All three
articles used a grounded theory to approach for the chosen phenomena. When considering
epistemology of these findings I believe it would have been compelling to use an ethnographic
study to create a more extensive understanding of this phenomena. An ethnographic methodology
would be valuable aspect for the topic since it gives more dynamic, ... Show more content on
Helpwriting.net ...
This type of issue has a great deal of sensitivity and The implications for future practice is a
significant consideration. Creating quality end of life for patients is a concept that has deemed merit.
This can be completed through the implementation of educational and enhanced palliative
programs. Training programs on improving communication in relation to palliation and dying would
allow for better outcomes. This would better communication and comprehension of the

Inquiry Concerning Human Understanding by David Hume Essay
David Hume wrote Inquiry Concerning Human Understanding in 1748, right in the middle of the
Enlightenment and on the eve of the Industrial and Scientific Revolution. So it only makes sense
that some of the ideas and comparisons used are slightly outdated, but science, if anything, helps his
argument regarding causality. Hume is ultimately concerned with the origins of causality, how we
are able to gain knowledge from causality, and if we can even call the knowledge derived from
causality real knowledge. This is essentially the problem of induction, and is a central pillar of
Hume's overall philosophy. There are some significant objections to Hume's ideas concerning
causality, but they do not hold much clout and are no match for his ... Show more content on
Helpwriting.net ...
Therefore, it can be asserted that knowledge gained from causality is not a priori, rather a posteriori,
which is knowledge gained from experience and empirical evidence. One objection to Hume's
definition of causality was written by a fellow (omit) named Thomas Reid. His problem with
Hume's definition was that it led to absurd conclusions. The example Reid uses is one of night and
day. Reid asserts that if one follows Hume's definition of cause, then one can postulate that day is
the cause of night, and night is the cause of day, which goes on forever and is circular. Thus, by
Reid's account, the definition of cause is absurd, and cannot hold (sp) any value. This cannot be
further from the truth. Reid's example is severely (sp) lacking in rational thinking, but one cannot
blame him too much due to the time period in which he resided. omit in. The fact of the matter is
that day is not the cause of night, nor is night the cause of day. As the Earth rotates on its axis, half
of the Earth is bathed in the Sun's light, while the other half is in darkness. This is always the case,
even as the Earth spins. Thus the Sun is the cause of both day and night, not day the cause of night
and vice versa. Reid's objection now has very little ground to stand on, and it is made even more
apparent when one considers certain Alaskan towns, which depending on the season, can experience
more than 24 hours of night at a time. It is by

Naturalized Epistemology
There are two types of epistemology: Theoretical and Normative. Theoretical epistemology is the
study of what evidence we truly have for whatever theories we actually hold. Normative
epistemology is the study of how to adjust our theories in order most effectively to anticipate
sensory stimulation. Kim argues that the field of study of epistemology should be narrative and
therefore must assign conditions for justification and knowledge and must determine whether a
belief is justified and whether a belief can be considered knowledge. Kim argues that Quine forces
an incorrect choice between traditional epistemology (or foundationalism) and Naturalized
Epistemology and proposes that there are viable alternatives. Kim states that Quine's program

Is Man The Measure Of All?
Barrett Kitterman
Philosophy 3001
Paper 2, Question 1
Is Man the Measure of All?
What does Protagoras mean when he states that "Man is the measure of all things," and why does
Plato reject such a notion? Before we answer these questions, we must first ask ourselves, what is
reality? Does the world have a reality independent of the one you and I perceive? Are qualities such
as right and wrong, correct and incorrect entirely subjective? Or are they objective properties of
people, places, and things? The answers to these questions are what's at stake for both Protagoras
and Plato, and both offer significantly different perspectives. We will analyze what Protagoras
proffers about the nature of reality, touching upon the Measure Doctrine, his conception ... Show
What does he mean when he states that "...a human being is the measure of all things–of things that
are, how they are, and of things that are not, how they are not"? (Irwin, p. 97, box 158). By "things,"
Protagoras is referring to the properties of people, places, objects, and processes in the universe, and
perhaps even referring to the people, places, objects, and processes themselves; we will examine the
implications of both interpretations. By calling humans "measure[s]," Protagoras means our
perceptions dictate how people, places, objects, processes, and their properties seem to us. That is,
"things that are, [and] how they are" are relative to individuals' unique perceptions of those things;
the things and their qualities, in and of themselves, do not exist. Take temperature, or hotness, as an
example of a thing (or a property of one); in Protagoras' view, there is no objective or universal
hotness, rather, there is only the perception of hotness. Moreover, the perception of hotness may
vary, or be unique to every individual perceiver. Let's be concrete by considering the temperature of
a hypothetical cup of coffee. A cup of coffee that I perceive to be hot may not feel hot to you. I feel
the cup and immediately recoil,

Racism And Ignorance
Racism is a controversial issue that has been publicly debated throughout centuries even until now
that people tend to treat people as less equal than others due to different identities such as different
skin colours, genders or race. Mill's assignment, White Ignorance, proclaims that racism is
concluded with an epistemology of ignorance. In other words, the academics used various forms of
ignorances to support the idea that racism is not a simple gap in knowledge; whereas, it is the
'accidental result of an epistemological error' (XXX). Moreover, It is very easy to label people with
our own stereotypical perceptions and prejudices. In addition, identity is constructed due to the
inadequate awareness of racism both intentionally and unintentionally. ... Show more content on
Helpwriting.net ...
Even some influential thinkers in the western history did not avoid the critiques from the society.
Charles Darwin was a prominent English naturalist who had the great contribution to the
evolutionary theory (2004). Obviously, his well–known evolutionary thinkings such as "Natural
Selection" and "Social Darwinism" indirectly inferred a racist perspective towards different ethnic
groups. According to his work, The Descent of Man implicitly argued that the 'civilized races' would
eventually supersede the 'savage races'. In 1788, Captain Arthur Philip brought around 1400 people
landing at Camp Cove, which later became the first British colony in Australia (2015). Moreover,
the relations between the British newcomers (the wealthy whites) and the Aboriginal people were
getting worse and less hospitable because native inhabitants gradually realised that their precious
food and land recourses were taken by the British colonists. They started to brainwash people and
label the indigenous people as the "inferior races" due to their dark skin colour and
biological/physical structures. This example demonstrates an explicit idea that the educated people
are having prejudices and epistemological ignorance about the nonwhites. According to the
assignment of Francis Jennings in 1976, points out that, "the Englishman [created] the
savage...considerable alteration of meaning as different colonists pursued their varied ends", the
savage was always inferior to civilized men (Mills, 26). Not only Darwin and Jennings developed
these racist perspectives, but some prominent social scientists, for instance, William Graham`
Sumner, also raised an idea that the best individual (the wealthy whites) were the 'product of natural
selection' would win out the inferior individuals (the nonwhites/ coloured people) (2004). Referring
back to

Realism In Quine's Naturalism And Traditional Epistemology
Quine's naturalism stands in stark contrast to the prevailing epistemological climate of his day.
Traditional epistemology prides itself on the distinctive method of a priori reflection on our
preexisting concepts. The goal of traditional epistemology is to formulate necessary and sufficient
conditions for justification. Traditional epistemologists often attempt to analyze justification by
proposing criteria and testing said criteria with thought experiments. Successful criteria for
justification must include every case that we can intuitively consider to be an instance of knowledge
and exclude every scenario in which our intuitions tell us that knowledge is lacking. A famous
example of this method of includes Gettier cases. He proposes that Epistemology conceived as a
philosophical field independent of the natural sciences has proved unable to reach its aims and
should be replaced by a conception of epistemology which views it as a branch of empirical
psychology. He bases his argument on the failure of other types of epistemology, focusing on two
dominant forms of Epistemology that are foundational in nature: Cartesian and Carnapian. Quine
bases his replacement on the argument that the Cartesian and Carnapian fail to achieve their
respective goals. Quine acknowledges the existence of two sub–groups that fall under traditional
epistemology: a conceptual and a doctrinal side. The doctrinal epistemology is the attempt to stem
our knowledge of the world from immediate

WK 1 DQ 1 Essay
Introduction
This paper intends to discuss the role of epistemology in research while defining knowledge as fact
or fiction in society which constantly changes. The writer intends to utilize various methods of
acquiring knowledge in both the natural tangible and intangible world composition. The end result
may offer the reader a better understanding of the influences and formulation of a management
research problem of knowledge itself.
Epistemology and Knowledge
What is knowledge? Easterby–Smith et al. (2012, p. 21) note that epistemology is inquiring via
various methods regarding the composition of nature in both physical and social worlds. Knowledge
itself can be described on what insight is gained from the situation regardless if the ... Show more
content on Helpwriting.net ...
How we know what we know
How do we know what we know? The upbringing of an individual, experiences, communication,
research, observation, feedback and awareness are all particulars of how knowledge is gained and
transferred. It is of note that every individual is unique therefore fact and fiction will be perceived in
various manners. Theories and philosophies often are taken into consideration when management
research formulation or problems occur. Van Gich (2002) compares the epistemology disciplines in
science as modern physics versus social sciences. Both of these methods have evolved with our ever
changing society. Van Gich (2002, p. 201) mentions that Scientists believe knowledge should be
considered 'objectively' without being persuaded by any extenuating circumstances such as people
or place whereas philosophers tend to argue that knowledge should be subjective to perception and
thought analysis. Easterby–Smith et al. (2012) note there has been a long standing tension in the
conduction of management research. Should management research lead to an epistemological
stance? The writer believes that every situation is unique applying objective concepts in certain
circumstances and subjective concepts in others. Both concepts may be utilized in certain cases.
Conclusion
It is quite possible to gain knowledge from both tangible and intangible characteristics of our every
changing society today. The variables depend on the intended outcome. Epistemology in
management

Space 's Perception Of Space
Of defining space, the largest question Kant had to wrestle with was whether space was a property
of objects or a condition set in mental faculty. In order to determine this, space needed to be
established as it stands as knowledge. Kant defines space as a priori intuition of transcendental
ideality.
Kant demonstrates that our sense of space cannot come from experience. When one perceives an
object they relate the sensations that coordinate to that object a place. For example, one gets the
sensation of the color of an apple and coordinates that color to the apple and the space that the apple
occupies, in order for the apple to be red. The color red corresponds to the apple while the color of
the table it is resting on coordinates to the table, keeping to two distinct positions in space. In order
for an individual to relate an object as outside of them, they must assign them to a place. If this is
the case, then space is a necessary base to one's perception of an object. So one cannot gain the
intuition of space empirically as space is necessary to one's experience of the external world in order
to have sensibility, or the faculty to passively know objects through sensation. Space is a condition
to the perception of objects rather than a property of the objects themselves so there cannot be a
perception of the objects without space. "It is impossible to have a representation of there being no
space, though one can very well think of space without objects to fill it." (B39

Concepts Of Knowledge, Reality And Existence
The word philosophy derives from Greece, meaning "love of wisdom" and is the study of the basic
concepts of knowledge, reality and existence (Dictionary.com, 2014). Someone who studies
philosophy is called a philosopher; generally they are an individual who loves wisdom (Price,
Lecture 6, 2014). Often said to be the study of questions philosophy raises, what human beings label
as "life's big questions," which leads to them pondering life on a bigger scale. Philosophers ask a lot
of questions and they are looking to answer questions they, personally, have about life. People study
philosophy because they want to discover and understand the truth about themselves as an
individual, the truth about the world that they live in and their relationships relating to the world and
others in it.
Philosophy is broken up into three concepts; "an activity, a set of attitudes and a body of content"
(Knight, 2006). The body of content concept of philosophy is known as "epistemology, metaphysics
and axiology" (Cohen, 2014). Epistemology is the study of "the nature of truth and knowledge"
(Knight, 2006). Metaphysics is the study of questions relating to reality. Axiology is "the study of
questions of value" and also includes the concepts of ethics and aesthetics (Knight, 2006). Ethics
studies moral values and conduct aiming to answer questions about what an individual should do,
what is a good life and what is good conduct. Aesthetics is the study of beauty focusing on what art
is but not

Does the Causal Theory of Knowledge Solve the Gettier...
The purpose of this paper is to argue that Alvin Goldman's paper "A Causal Theory of Knowing"
does not solve the problem in Edmund Gettier's paper "Is Justified True Belief Knowledge?" To
argue the old view of knowledge, Gettier presents a case in which a Subject (S) is justified in
believing that a proposition (P) and P entails another proposition (Q). S deduces Q from P and
accepts Q. Then S is justified in believing Q. In the first Case that Gettier presents however, P is
falsely justified, but Q is a true justified belief: Smith (S) is justified in believing that Jones is the
man who will get the job and Jones has ten coins in his pocket (P). Thus, the man who will get the
job has ten coins in his pocket (Q). S is justified in ... Show more content on Helpwriting.net ...
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?
Goldman states that S knows p if and only if, p is causally connected in an appropriate way with S's
belief of p. He defines appropriate knowledge–producing causal processes as perception, memory, a
causal chain, or a combination of the three. He does not however make a distinction between
appropriate and inappropriate. Perceptions can be deceptive. For example, what if I was blind in one
eye and had no depth perception and was unaware of this my entire life but I have been
compensating for the loss of vision by tilting my head to the left. If Goldman was to place a
photograph of a vase in front of me and made sure that my head was straight and asked me to look
at the vase and tell him if it was straight or not and real or not, I would reply, "It is a real vase tilting
to the left." I cannot tell if this is a real of fake vase without touching it. Can I believe it to be
knowledge even though it appears wrong to everyone who

Organizational Epistemology
Running Head: ORGANIZATIONAL EPISTEMOLOGY
1
Organizational Epistemology St. Rachel E. Ustanny University of Phoenix
ORGANIZATIONAL EPISTEMOLOGY
2
There are different perspectives about the origin of knowledge, which have influenced the
development of concepts such as a priori and a posteriori truth, epistemic regress, and sensual
perception–Descartes (as cited in Cooper, 1999) argued that there are certain undeniable truths,
which are obtained from our senses; Feldman (2003) noted that truth is obtained through one of or a
combination of six means: perception, memory, testimony, introspection, reasoning, and rational
insight; Feldman (2003) also reported that evidentialists believe that propositions must be ... Show
79). This shift has increased the significance of epistemology in the workplace in that
ORGANIZATIONAL EPISTEMOLOGY
4
managers are forced to contend with the sources and origin of knowledge that workers possess as a
means of enhancing companies' capacities to improve the productivity of the knowledge worker as
was done by Taylor during the heyday of manual work. Knowledge work has challenged the society
to come to terms with the importance of epistemology in everyday life and to find ways of
optimizing it for development. Knowledge management is proposed by Wong and Aspinwall (2004)
as a strategy for increasing the productivity of the knowledge worker, but despite this there are still
challenges as it relates to those who possess tacit knowledge–the major concern for companies is the
loss of productivity advances when the tacit knowledge worker leaves. It has therefore become
increasingly important to find out how individuals gain knowledge in the first place, and then
attempt to replicate those actions that are engaged in on a daily basis, which optimizes productivity,
efficiency, and effectiveness. One cannot solve the epistemological problems of the contemporary
workplace without reflecting on earlier conceptions about epistemology as articulated by

empiricists, rationalists, pragmatists, and relativists. Empiricism argued that knowledge is derived
from human sensual experiences and perceptions (Cooper, 1999, p.

Management Research Methods
Management research can be describe as a systematic form that is seeks to answer a given question
in the field of management (Mennen, 2010). It involves conducting a search systematically with the
view of developing viable solutions for problems encountered in business and management.
(Saunders, Lewis & Thornhill, 2012). The paper expands on the concept of management research. It
gives detailed examples to explain the different terms encountered in the field of management
research. The philosophy of management research introduces various concepts that are central to the
success of a research tackling various kinds of management problems (Saunders, Lewis &
Thornhill, 2012). Ontology deals with the process of identifying the type of management of
knowledge and how to manage it. Ontology refers to the assumptions that a research makes in
regard to reality (Easterby–Smith, Thorpe & Jackson, 2012). It looks at what creates and influences
social realities in the world of management. It describes the view that we take based on the nature of
reality that is whether it is subjective or objective. Objectivist ontology refers to the discovery of
realities in relation to objectives of a research. The assumption is that social phenomena was present
even before social actors came into existence. Constructivist ontology seeks to show the basic
differences that exist between reality and social phenomenon (Grant, 2011). It checks on individual
realities, social realities and researcher

What Is The Truth-Belief-Belief Conceptual Analysis Of...
In this paper, I will discuss the truth–belief–justification conceptual analysis of knowledge, which I
will refer to as TBJ, Gettier cases, and an example that refutes TBJ. Conceptual analysis is an
analysis of a proposition P with given premises to acquire knowledge of that P. The truth–belief–
justification analysis of knowledge fails to provide sufficient conditions for someone to possess
knowledge. For a condition to be necessary, it has to be satisfied to have knowledge of a
proposition. If a condition is sufficient, then the person x will have some information to know
something about proposition P. Jointly sufficient conditions are conditions that all need to be
satisfied together to have knowledge about some P. They are necessary and supposedly jointly
sufficient, but Gettier cases prove that extra conditions on top of TBJ are required to be jointly
sufficient. The TBJ analysis identifies three conditions that are necessary and supposedly jointly
sufficient for some person x to know some proposition P. Truth indicates that the proposition P has
to be true. The truth needs to correspond to some true fact that relates to the world, such as that the
Earth is round. It is necessary because a proposition P can only be deduced by factual evidence
shown to x. However, truth by itself is not sufficient because truth itself is just a random fact. In
addition, the person, x, needs to hold some sort of belief in their proposition P. If you do not believe
in a proposition P, then it cannot be known, since you will not have any grounds on which to base
your knowledge of that P. It is a necessary condition since "you can only know what you believe".
However, it is not a sufficient condition by itself because a belief is just x's opinion of a subject.
Finally, the person, x's belief has to be accompanied by observations from their senses, prior
knowledge, or deductive reasoning, which in effect, explains what the justification is. This may
come from what people may see with their eyes, or forming a conclusion from previously assumed
premises. Justification is a necessary condition because the allegedly known beliefs have to be
adequately justified. Fallibility of justification is assumed since no justification can

Epistemology And Belief Of Epistemology Essay
In this paper I will be writing about knowledge and belief referring to epistemology. I will be
answering questions such as, "What is knowledge" and "What is belief". I will also answer other
questions related to the epistemology of knowledge and beliefs. Before we get into knowledge and
beliefs, we must define what epistemology is and why epistemology is important. What is
epistemology? The word itself derives from two Greek words: "Episteme" meaning knowledge and
understanding and "Logia" meaning science of study. In philosophy, epistemology is the study of
knowledge, in general. Examples of epistemological questions would be; what does knowledge
mean, how does a person get to know something, and what is the basis for true knowledge.
Epistemology has to do with how people's minds are connected to reality, whether invalid or valid.
What is the importance of epistemology? Epistemology explains our way of thinking. Through the
correct use of evaluation, epistemology is necessary to be able to separate what is true and what is
false. We couldn't think if not for epistemology. In other words, we wouldn't have a reason to trust
our thinking was valid. We would anything we see or hear to be true. An inaccurate epistemology
would lead us to not know how to separate truth and mistaken truth. Obviously, there are
consequences to inaccurate epistemology. The level that our epistemology is accurate is the level in
which we grasp to concept of reality, and the level in which we use

Similarities Of Ontology And Epistemology
In the study of philosophy, Metaphysics (Ontology) and Epistemology are probably the two most
broad and complex branches or terms one may come across. The correlation between epistemology
and metaphysics is based on the understanding that epistemology justifies what otherwise would be
"correctable" knowledge, that moves concepts into reality. Without epistemology, nothing in
metaphysical study would have any sort of authority or weight and this is significant because
metaphysical beliefs or concepts cannot depend on traditional scientific methods to be proven true.
In my opinion in the context of education, both models and theories are closely intertwined subjects
that cannot be completely differentiated as one being more important than the ... Show more content
on Helpwriting.net ...
However variations in metaphysical beliefs have led to different approaches and systems of
education hence the reason why so many private Christian and other religious schools exist today. In
particular the anthropological aspect of metaphysics is in this context, is especially important to
educators of all persuasions because of the ability to mold imperfect human minds at varying
impressionable stages of their lives.
Epistemology is also derived from the Greek word 'episteme' meaning knowledge and 'logos' which
means study or the suffix '–ology' which means 'study of'. It is that branch of philosophy that
focuses at discovering the true meaning of knowledge, how that knowledge is acquired and human
knowledge limitations sources and characteristics, simply put, "how do you know what is true?" It is
one thing to believe something but quite another to feel justified in believing that something is true.
Epistemology is divided into two parts

Ethos, Epistemology, Logic, Ontology, And Concept Of Self

Recommended

Recommended

More Related Content

More from Tia Richardson

More from Tia Richardson (9)

Recently uploaded

Recently uploaded (20)

Ethos, Epistemology, Logic, Ontology, And Concept Of Self