Epistemology

Epistemology

Plato
1. What is knowledge
  1. He said there are 3 tests for certain knowledge (JTB): Believe in your statement, your belief has to be true, and your true belief must be justified
Descartes
1. What is knowledge
  1. Descartes' 3 waves of doubt: Illusion, Dreaming and Deception (the evil demon)
  2. He knows for certain that... He has the ability to think (and is therefore real), Mathematics and Geometry are true and that God is Real.
2. Reason as a source of Knowledge
  1. Descartes establishes the mind as a thinking entity that can rationally possess though. We may exist without a body, senses or memory but man cannot exist if he does not think. He uses the Wax Argument to demonstrate this.
  2. Descartes' Trademark Argument: He tries to prove the existence of God as a being that is supremely powerful and perfect. He claims that all causes must have at least as much reality as the effects. He argues that only God has as much relity as what the concept of God represents.
  3. The existence of the External World: Descartes argues that an external world outsie of our minds. He proves that his mind and body are connected.
  4. Descartes' 6th Meditation... He aims to prove whether material things exist and that the external world is a clear and distinct perception. He proves beings other than himself, he proves he exists within a body, he proves his mind is different to his body and shows the connection between body and mind.
Nozick
1. What is Knowledge
  1. Tracking the Truth: P is true. You believe that P. (In the situation you are in) If P were not true, then you would not believe that P. (In the situation you are in) If P were true then you would believe in P.
Russell
1. Perception as a source of Knowledge
  1. Russell's Table: The problem with Perceptual Variation Russell said that a shiny brown table doesn't look the same colour all over. He claimed that there is an apprearence/reality distinction.
  2. Russell responded to Indirect Realism saying: Either physical objects exist and cause my sense data or physical objects do not exist and so do not cause my sense data. I can't prove that either claim is true. Therefore, I have to treat them as hypothesis. They hypothesis that physical objects exist and cause my sense data is better. Therefore, physical objects exist and cause my sense data.
Locke
1. Perception as a source of knowledge
  1. Locke's Theory, Primary and Secondary Qualities He said primary qualities are qualities that cannot be removed from the physical object, e.g. Extension, Figure, Motion, Solidity and Number. He said secondary qualities are mind dependant perceptions of the object, e.g. Colour, Texture, Sound and Smell.
2. Reason as a source of knowledge
  1. Locke argues against innatism by presenting a range of arguments which can be divided into the 'positive' and 'negative'. His main approach is undermining innatism is to attack the idea of universal consent.
  2. Locke's Transparency of Ideas He says that there maybe ideas 'in' your mind that you are not consciously aware of.
  3. No ideas are universally held Any innate ideas, 'X', if it exists, would be universally held. Children and idiots do not have the idea of 'X'. The notion of a person having an innate idea, 'X', and not being aware of it does not make sense. So 'X' is not universally held. Therefore, 'X' is not innate.
  4. The mind as Tabula Rasa Tabula Rasa involves Locke suggesting that the human mind at birth is a 'blank slate'.
Berkeley
1. Perception as a source of knowledge
  1. He criticised Locke's Theory saying that all secondary qualities are actually primary qualities too. E.g.you can't imagine an object with no colour.
  2. Berkeley's Idealism: Arguments against Mind Independence He formed 4 arguemts - Primary qualities are mind dependant; Material Substratum; Berkeley believes we dont just see physical objects and The Master Arguments. He says that everything is mind dependant and for everything to exist, it has to be conceived.
Leibniz
1. Reason as a source of knowledge
  1. The Theory from Necessity of Truth He believed we could gain knowledge of the world through reason and supported the existence of innate ideas which he calls 'principles'.
  2. Innate Ideas He says that logic has many truths, but he says the proof for these truths must only come from inner principles, i.e. innatism.
  3. How can we distinguish between innate ideas and from other ideas. Leibniz claims that although young children may not be able to know of the truth of mathematics, once they do understand a truth, the mind immediately recognises that this truth has an eternal application.
Kant
1. Reason as a source of knowledge
  1. Kant's First Argument: "God does not exist" is not self-contradictory. The statement can be true or false. Any statement about an object can be self-contradictory, but if it didn't exist in the first place, then it has no essence to be contradicted.
  2. Kant's Second Argument: Saying X exists does not add any real information about X. Because by talking about in the first place, we assume that X does indeed exist.
Anselm
1. Reason as a source of knowledge
  1. In proslogion 2, assuming that Anselm is trying to give proof of God, he says that it is impossible to conceive of a 'greater being' which does not really exist, since then it would not be the greatest. Existence is a real property which a true concept of God must possess. If we have a true concept of God then he MUST exist.
Gaunilo
1. Reason as a source of knowledge
  1. He rejected Anselm's arguments by making a parody of it. He said that if we have a concept of the greatest conceivable island, does this island exist in the mind only or in reality as well?

Next up

Description

Resource summary

Similar

	Created by Emma-Rose Walters over 5 years ago