Term
| Describe Propositional Knowledge |
|
Definition
-knowledge as truth claims
ex. I know the JFK was the president
-the kind epistemology is concerned with |
|
|
Term
| Describe the Socratic Method |
|
Definition
| consists of asking and answering questions to find truth |
|
|
Term
| Describe Traditional Definition of Knowledge |
|
Definition
Justified True Belief (JTB)
S knows p IFF
1. S believes p to be true
2. P is really true
3. S is justified/has good reasons to believe p |
|
|
Term
| Describe the Gettier Problem |
|
Definition
-you may have JTB but is it sufficient for knowledge?
Responses:
1. Strengthening Justification-certainty
2. Adding a 4th Condition- JTB+____
-Infinite Regress: how do you know if the justification is true?
-Casual Connection
-Defeasibility Condition |
|
|
Term
Define the following:
1. Defeasibility Condition
2. Defeater |
|
Definition
1. for a belief in p there must be no competing proposition where it would cause p to be false
2. competing proposition that would cause p to be false |
|
|
Term
Define the following:
1. Skepticism
2. Skeptical Thesis |
|
Definition
1. To suspend judgment concerning knowledge claims
2. No one knows anything |
|
|
Term
Describe the following types of Skepticism:
1. Mitigated
2. Unmitigated
3. Global
4. Metaphysical |
|
Definition
1. the skeptical thesis is true, but I do not know its true, I just believe it is
2. the skeptical thesis is true, and I know its true
3. same as unmitigated
4. I know some things (analytical and empirical) but cannot know other things (metaphysical) |
|
|
Term
| Describe Systematic Doubt |
|
Definition
Descartes
-Senses
-Reason
-Dreaming Hypothesis
-Evil Demon Hypothesis (Matrix) |
|
|
Term
Describe David Hume's 2 Categories of Knowledge:
1. Relations of Ideas
2. Matters of Fact |
|
Definition
1. logically true but tell nothing about reality
ex. math, definitions
2. claims about reality based on perceptions that can never be certain |
|
|
Term
Describe the following:
1. Egocentric Predicament
2. Epistemic Humility |
|
Definition
1. not being able to view reality outside of our own perceptions
2. realizing the limitations of human cognitive abilities |
|
|
Term
Describe the following:
1. Analytic Proposition
2. Synthetic Proposition |
|
Definition
1. predicate is contained in the subject
2. predicate adds something to the subject |
|
|
Term
Define the following types of Knowledge:
1. A priori
2. A posteriori |
|
Definition
1. not dependent on the senses
2. depends on evidence from sense experience |
|
|
Term
Define the following:
1. Rationalism
2. Empiricism |
|
Definition
1. we know everything already; learning is a process of recollection of what we already know; some knowledge comes from other means besides sensory experience
2. man is born with a blank slate on which sense experiences write everything; all knowledge comes from sense experience |
|
|
Term
Define the following Latin terms:
1. Tabula Rasa
2. Cogito ergo sum
3. Noumena
4. Phenomena |
|
Definition
1. blank slate; the mind that we are born with that all knowledge is written upon; John Locke
2. I think, therefore I am; Descartes
3. raw data; provided by reality that is then manipulated
4. knowledge that was manipulated and organized from raw data; Kant |
|
|
Term
Define the following:
1. Intuition
2. Geometric Method |
|
Definition
1. knowledge arrived at immediately
2. Descartes idea to reach true conclusions; made of theorems and deduction |
|
|
Term
| Describe the Ontological Argument |
|
Definition
-Descartes argument that proved the existence of God
-he thought he could then prove existence of matter, God, and himself |
|
|
Term
Describe the following:
1. External Sensation
2. Internal Reflection |
|
Definition
1. enter our minds as passive, simple ideas
2. our mind creates complex ideas through combination, comparison and contrast, and abstraction from the simple ideas |
|
|
Term
| Describe Locke's Epistemological Dualism |
|
Definition
-two elements in knowing:
1. the object out there that we perceive
2. the representation of it in our minds, our ideas |
|
|
Term
| Describe the Transcendental Argument |
|
Definition
| You can't observe the object itself, but its existence is necessary for you to observe it |
|
|
Term
Define the following:
1. Categories of understanding
2. Synthetic a priori knowledge |
|
Definition
1. things we are born with that help us understand sense experience
2. same thing |
|
|
Term
Define the following:
1. Correspondence Theory of Truth
2. Coherence Theory of Truth
3. Pragmatic Theory of Truth |
|
Definition
1. a proposition is true if it corresponds with the facts of reality
2. a proposition is true if it corresponds with other true propositions
3. a proposition is true if it is successful in explaining phenomena or in achieving desired consequences |
|
|
Term
| Describe Noetic Structure |
|
Definition
-structure of ones belief system
-explains how they fit together
-foundationalism vs. coherentism |
|
|
Term
| Define Epistemic Deontology |
|
Definition
-we have a duty to be responsible in justifying our beliefs
-do we have to know that we know |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
-all beliefs are divided into basic and non basic beliefs
-the most foundational beliefs are properly basic beliefs (beliefs needing no justification) |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
-all beliefs fall into one category
-no beliefs are more foundational than another
-some beliefs are more central than others |
|
|
Term
| What are the 3 problems with Coherentism? |
|
Definition
1. Circularity
-how do you justify each belief if they all cohere together
2. Isolation
-beliefs are isolated from the outside world
-as long as they cohere with each other, they work in this system
-how does one justify the first belief
3. Plurality
-it is possible to have two systems that are incompatible |
|
|
Term
| What are the 3 characteristics of Noetic Structure? |
|
Definition
1. includes all the beliefs of a person
-true and false
2. recognizes differing degrees of certainty
3. characterized by how beliefs are related together |
|
|
Term
Describe Strong Foundationalism
1. 3 criteria for a basic belief
2. Basing Relation
3. 2nd and 3rd criticism |
|
Definition
1. a. self evidential
b. incorrigible (I feel pain)
c. evident to the senses (I see green)
2. relation between basic and non basic is deductive; the truth of basic guarantees truth of non basic
3. a. criteria are self defeating
b. the "myth of the given" |
|
|
Term
Describe Modest Foundationalism
1. 3 criteria for a basic belief
2. Basing Relation |
|
Definition
1. a. self evidential
b. indefeasible in absence of defeaters
c. Prima Facie Justified (self presenting at face value)
2. not as strict as foundational; induction, abduction, concurrence
-basic make non belief probable but not certain |
|
|
Term
| Define Internalism and Externalism |
|
Definition
Internalism-Justification requires that one be able to have internal access (through reflection) to one’s reasons that support one’s beliefs
Externalism-A belief is warranted or has positive epistemic status if it is formed by properly functioning cognitive processes even if I am not aware of such processes |
|
|
Term
Define the following:
1. Reliablism
2. Evidentialism |
|
Definition
1. Justification is a condition that occurs when one’s cognitive faculties are working reliably
2. every belief justified by another more foundational belief |
|
|
Term
Describe the following with Internalism:
1. Motivation
2. Evidentialism
3. Problems with Clifford |
|
Definition
1. epistemic responsibility to form responsible beliefs; can only due this by justifying beliefs
2. every belief must be supported by another more foundational belief
3. Clifford provides no evidence for his belief; standard is too high |
|
|
Term
Describe the following with Externalism:
1. Motivation
2. How are processes reliable? |
|
Definition
1. it accords with out basic intuitions with most our beliefs
-most people believe things without knowing why
2. Don’t have to answer that question to be justified – they either are or aren’t – the fact of their reliability is what makes one justified, not that we know they are reliable
-there is no reason to no trust the senses |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
1. some beliefs we are warranted in trusting (memories and senses)
2. we have epistemic duty to withhold affirming some beliefs without evidence (cure for cancer)
-both are necessary
-externalism can incorporate internalism |
|
|
Term
| Describe the arguments for and against the Correspondence Theory |
|
Definition
For: accords with our most basic intuitions about truth
-links truth with reality which provides us a reliable check on the truthfulness of propositions
Against:
-we may not see reality equally
-does not apply to non factual claims
-does not account for the Liar's Paradox |
|
|
Term
| Describe the arguments for and against the Coherence Theory |
|
Definition
For:
-helps establish truth about areas where facts may not be known
-many systems work this way (ethics, math, politics)
Against:
-necessary for truth but not a sufficient condition
-how does one start the system
-not concerned with the real world, only systems of beliefs |
|
|
Term
| Describe Plato’s theory of knowledge |
|
Definition
-learning is a process of what we already know
-there are two worlds; this one (world of becoming) and the world with all the perfect "forms" (being)
-we innately know everything but during birth knowledge was lost in our subconscious |
|
|
Term
| Describe Descartes two operations in philosophy |
|
Definition
Intuition- knowledge arrived at immediately
Deduction- conclusions that must be true |
|
|
Term
| What are John Locke's famous government writings and Bible commentaries? |
|
Definition
-Essay Concerning Human Understanding and Two Treatises Of Civil Government (1690)
-Later years wrote Bible commentaries |
|
|
Term
Describe Locke's division of knowledge
1. External sensations
2. Internal reflection |
|
Definition
1. enter our minds as passively simple ideas
2. our mind actively creates complex ideas through combination, compare and contrast, and abstraction |
|
|
Term
| Describes Hume's radical empiricism and extreme conclusion |
|
Definition
-sense knowledge is the only kind of knowledge of reality there is
Conclusion: rejected all metaphysical claims on knowledge (time, mind, casual connection) |
|
|
Term
How did Kant agree and disagree with Hume?
How did he argue his points? |
|
Definition
Agree: reasoning
Disagree: conclusion
-Kant believed you could know about time and space
*Argued transcendentally
-if they are there, there must be space for them to occupy |
|
|
Term
| Explain Kant’s Copernican revolution |
|
Definition
| Our mind does not conform to reality, reality conforms to our minds in a way we understand it. It is actively shaping the world in accordance with our categories of understanding |
|
|
Term
| Know Conclusion to Kant – what can we know and what can’t we know. |
|
Definition
-cannot know the real world without categories of understanding
-what is known through them is certain |
|
|
Term
| Explain 2nd, 3rd and last of the modes of doubt from Pyrrho |
|
Definition
Nothing whatsoever is certain and therefore the wise man will always suspend judgment on all matters
2nd: differences in human beings
3rd: differences between sense organs
Last: differences of occurrence |
|
|
Term
| Describe the 4 parts of systematic doubt from Descartes |
|
Definition
1. Senses
2. Reason
3. Dreaming Hypothesis
4. Evil Demon Hypothesis |
|
|
Term
Describe the following from David Hume:
Hume's Fork
1. relation of ideas
2. matters of fact |
|
Definition
1. a. relations of ideas-logically true and therefore true but tell nothing about reality (math, definitions)
b. matters of fact- claims about reality based on perceptions, but can never be certain |
|
|
Term
| Know three types of knowledge and which epistemology deals with |
|
Definition
1. Acquaintance: I know John
2. Competency: I know Spanish
*3. Truth Claims: I know Obama is president* |
|
|
