Knowledge Gettier’s Argument. Review The Tripartite Analysis: S knows that p iff S has a justified, true belief that p. The Knowledge Thesis: In order.

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
Knowledge as JTB Someone S has knowledge of P IFF: 1. S believes P 2. S is justified in believing P 3. P is true.
Advertisements

Theories of Knowledge Knowledge is Justified-True-Belief Person, S, knows a proposition, y, iff: Y is true; S believes y; Y is justified for S. (Note:
Anselm On the Existence of God. “Nor do I seek to understand so that I can believe, but rather I believe so that I can understand. For I believe this.
Meditation IV God is not a Deceiver, Truth Criterion & Problem of Error.
Justified True Belief Michael Lacewing © Michael Lacewing.
Gettier and the analysis of knowledge Michael Lacewing
Epistemology Tihamér Margitay – Péter Hartl 6. Reliabilism.
Is Same-Sex Marriage Wrong?
Hume’s Problem of Induction 2 Seminar 2: Philosophy of the Sciences Wednesday, 14 September
Descartes’ rationalism
Descartes’ rationalism
Theory of knowledge Lesson 2
Introduction to Epistemology. Perception- Transparency Good case and bad cases: illusion and hallucination Intentionalism- content of experience is same.
René Descartes ( ) Father of modern rationalism. Reason is the source of knowledge, not experience. All our ideas are innate. God fashioned us.
NOTE: CORRECTION TO SYLLABUS FOR ‘HUME ON CAUSATION’ WEEK 6 Mon May 2: Hume on inductive reasoning --Hume, Enquiry Concerning Human Understanding, section.
Knowledge The Pop Quiz Paradox. Replies to Gettier The Tripartite Analysis: S knows that p iff i. p is true, ii. S believes that p; iii. S’s belief that.
Created by David Turner
Hume on Taste Hume's account of judgments of taste parallels his discussion of judgments or moral right and wrong.  Both accounts use the internal/external.
Lecture Three “The Problem of Knowledge” Think (pp. 32 – 48)  Review last lecture  Descartes’ Clear and Distinct Ideas  “The Trademark Argument”  The.
The tripartite theory of knowledge
Matthew 22:37 –38: Jesus replied: "'Love the Lord your God with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your mind.' This is the first and.
Gettier’s response to JTB. Gettier put forward many examples to show that JTB doesn’t always mean we have knowledge, that actually in fact sometimes it’s.
The Perfect God Anselm’s clever trick.
Deeper.. last week what is christianity? what is christianity? doctrines doctrines apologetics apologetics.
Unit 8: Knowledge Chris Heathwood Office: Hellems 192
I.1 ii.2 iii.3 iv.4 1+1=. i.1 ii.2 iii.3 iv.4 1+1=
The Evil Demon Argument
Lecture 6 1. Mental gymnastics to prepare to tackle Hume 2. The Problem of Induction as Hume argues for it 1. His question 2. His possible solutions 3.
I.1 ii.2 iii.3 iv.4 1+1=. i.1 ii.2 iii.3 iv.4 1+1=
Kareem Khalifa Philosophy Department Middlebury College Epistemological Preliminaries.
Introduction to Philosophy Lecture 7 The argument from evil By David Kelsey.
© Michael Lacewing Faith without reason? Michael Lacewing
Descartes’ First Meditation
Knowledge, Skepticism, and Descartes. Knowing In normal life, we distinguish between knowing and just believing. “I think the keys are in my pocket.”
Knowledge and Belief Some fundamental problems. Knowledge: a problematic concept “Knowledge” is ambiguous in a number of ways; the term can mean variously:
MAKING GOOD ARGUMENTS 5 Key Ters. The Logic of Everyday Life Conversation A: I hear last semester was difficult. How do you think this term will go? B:
Epistemology Section 1 What is knowledge?
Lecture 2 (Think, pp. 14 – 34) Descartes and the Problem of Knowledge: I. Some historical and intellectual background II. What is knowledge? III. Descartes’
Descartes. Descartes - b.1596 d.1650 ❑ Not a skeptic – “there really is a world, that men have bodies, and the like (things which no one of sound mind.
Chapter 3: Knowledge Kant’s Revolution Introducing Philosophy, 10th edition Robert C. Solomon, Kathleen Higgins, and Clancy Martin.
Epistemology, Part I Introduction to Philosophy Jason M. Chang.
Infallible Justification Markus Lammenranta Humanistinen tiedekunta / Markus Lammenranta / Infallible Justification1.
How do I tackle a 15 mark equation?!. Identify the key words in the question Decide which of the central 3 themes/questions it is dealing with WRITE Write.
David Hume By Richard Jones and Dan Tedham. Biographical Details Born in 1711 in Scotland. Major work: Dialogues Concerning Natural Religion (1779) Contains.
Epistemology ► Area of Philosophy that deals with questions concerning knowledge ► Philosophy of Knowledge.
Reliabilism.
Epistemology – Study of Knowledge
Lesson 2: Common Misconceptions. Misconception 1 “Christianity must be proven scientifically; I’ll accept Christianity when you prove it with the scientific.
Epistemology ► Area of Philosophy that deals with questions concerning knowledge ► Philosophy of Knowledge.
5 mark question feedback... JTB account is only a definition of propositional knowledge. Explain precisely what it is about the JTB account that Gettier.
The Ontological Argument 1.If the GBI exists in the understanding alone, we can imagine it existing in reality. 2.Existing in reality is greater than existing.
Critical Thinking Lecture 7a Gettier
Introduction to Philosophy Lecture 8 Epistemology #1 By David Kelsey.
NO KNOW The man behind Naomi in Starbucks dropped his rabbit keyring, and she passed it back to him. The following day, she saw a bus screech to a halt,
René Descartes Brandon Lee Block D.
Knowledge LO: To understand the distinction between three different types of knowledge. To learn some basic epistemological distinctions. To understand.
Introduction to Philosophy Lecture 8 Epistemology #1
Journal 9/8/15 Is there anything in your life that you are 100% certain about? Anything you know for sure? Objective Tonight’s Homework To learn about.
Péter Hartl & Dr. Tihamér Margitay Dept. of Philosophy and the History of Science 1111 Budapest, Egry J. st. 1. E 610.
WEEK 4: EPISTEMOLOGY Introduction to Rationalism.
Section 7.3 What Do You Know? Knowing What Knowledge Is McGraw-Hill © 2013 McGraw-Hill Companies. All Rights Reserved.
Gettier and the analysis of knowledge
Michael Lacewing Reliabilism Michael Lacewing © Michael Lacewing.
On whiteboards Summarise Gettier’s two examples and explain what they show. Can you think of any responses to Gettier?
Quick Test (Bullet Point)
What can you remember? Why did we say Justification is necessary for knowledge? What did we say some of the issues with saying truth is necessary for.
An Argumentative Essay
Tonight.
Introduction to Philosophy Lecture 8 Epistemology #1
Analyzing and Evaluating Arguments
Presentation transcript:

Knowledge Gettier’s Argument

Review The Tripartite Analysis: S knows that p iff S has a justified, true belief that p. The Knowledge Thesis: In order to know that something is the case, you first have to rule out all the alternatives. The Fallabilist Reply: Knowledge is justified true belief and justification does not require certainty, so knowledge doesn’t require certainty either.

Gettier’s Case S mith and Jones are applying for a job with a company. Smith has just spoken to the president of the company and learned that Jones will get the job. Smith believes that Jones will get the job, and for good reason. Smith also believes that Jones has ten coins in his pocket. He just saw Jones empty his pocket looking for a quarter, and put ten coins back in the pocket. Smith has been watching him ever since and is sure he neither removed nor added any coins. Smith muses idly to himself, “Well, it looks like the person who will get the job has ten coins in his pocket.”

Gettier’s Case S uppose Smith gets the job (the company president changed his mind)… Furthermore, it turns out that Smith has ten coins in his pocket (something which Smith has no evidence about). Then “the person who will get the job has ten coins in his pocket.” Yet it is ridiculous to say Smith know this; it is sheer luck that it is true. -Poundstone, LOR

Gettier’s Argument 1) Smith has a justified, true belief that the person who will get the job has ten coins in his pocket. 2) If (1), then, if the Tripartite Analysis is correct, Smith knows that the person who will get the job has ten coins in his pocket. 3) Smith doesn’t know that the person who will get the job has ten coins in his pocket. 4) [So] The Tripartite Analysis isn’t correct.

Replies to Gettier The Tripartite Analysis: S knows that p iff i. p is true, ii. S believes that p; iii. S’s belief that p is justified; and iv. ???

Replies to Gettier First Proposal: S knows that p iff i. p is true, ii. S believes that p; iii. S’s belief that p is justified; and iv. S is certain that p.

Replies to Gettier Second Proposal: S knows that p iff i. p is true, ii. S believes that p; iii. S’s belief that p is justified; and iv. S’s justification for p does not involve any false beliefs.

Replies to Gettier D is a defeater for S’s belief that p iff were S to find out about D, he would no longer believe that p. Third Proposal: S knows that p iff i. p is true, ii. S believes that p; iii. S’s belief that p is justified; and iv. There is no defeater for S’s belief that p.