So, for context, I have just received some study materials for 'A' level philosophy. That's college level, for all you much beloved foreigners; the stage before undergraduate university level.
Anyway, the first topic on the list is epistemology, the theory of knowledge. It seems the traditional view of knowledge is that subject S knows proposition P if P is justified, and P is true, and S believes that P.
But what if P is unjustified, and untrue, and S doesn't believe that P? Is that not also some subtle sort of knowledge?
Is the unbelief that P different, or the same as, believing that not-P?
Best wishes, 2RM.
The Tripartite Definition of Knowledge
Moderator: Moderators
- 2ndRateMind
- Site Supporter
- Posts: 1540
- Joined: Wed Apr 19, 2017 4:25 am
- Location: Pilgrim on another way
- Has thanked: 65 times
- Been thanked: 68 times
Re: The Tripartite Definition of Knowledge
Post #2[Replying to post 1 by 2ndRateMind]
So you're really asking us to do your first class assignment for you!
So you're really asking us to do your first class assignment for you!
- 2ndRateMind
- Site Supporter
- Posts: 1540
- Joined: Wed Apr 19, 2017 4:25 am
- Location: Pilgrim on another way
- Has thanked: 65 times
- Been thanked: 68 times
Re: The Tripartite Definition of Knowledge
Post #3Not at all. I'm interested for this reason; Karl Popper proposes that science advances by disproving what isn't true, rather than by proving what is true. For Popper, no amount of observations can determine the accuracy of a theory, but it only takes one adverse observation to determine its inaccuracy. That is the nature of inductive arguments.peterk wrote: [Replying to post 1 by 2ndRateMind]
So you're really asking us to do your first class assignment for you!
And I suspect his approach has a wider application than only science. Maybe if we can disprove enough P's, and prove enough not-P's, in ethics, wider philosophy, theology, etc, then we will end up (by the process of elimination by trial and error) with an ultimate, objective account of the way the universe is. A Grand, Unified Theory of Everything. (GUToE, for short, hereafter). In this scenario, it would be the only option left to us.
A GUToE is way beyond the compass of any college level assignment, especially a first assignment, but it is one of the lines of enquiry I am interested in pursuing. The epistemology of a GUToE seems to me to be a scoping exercise worthwhile for its own sake, irrespective of college set essays and exams.
Best wishes, 2RM.
Last edited by 2ndRateMind on Sun Apr 01, 2018 7:19 am, edited 3 times in total.