1 Knowledge should work all of the time, not some of the time.
2 Knowledge is useful.
3 Knowledge answers questions
4 Knowledge solves problems.
5 Knowledge is made of facts.
6 Facts are true
7 Facts are true because they are useful, answer questions, solve problems. — ovdtogt
2 Knowledge is useful. — ovdtogt
knowledge is for Reason to be adopting a certain attitude towards your possession of it. — Bartricks
Plato proposed that knowledge involves having a justified true belief. — Bartricks
Same problems as the truth thread. Anthropomorphism... the personification of thinking about thought and belief(Reason). — creativesoul
Justified... or "well-grounded"? Did Plato use the term "justified"? — creativesoul
Is it well-grounded to believe that a broken clock is correct? — creativesoul
I don't see a difference - for they are all cases in which a person acquires a true belief in an epistemically responsible fashion... — Bartricks
The person believes that a broken clock is correct. — creativesoul
I take it that a belief is justified when there is a normative reason to believe it. Perhaps well-grounded means something different.... — Bartricks
Plato proposed that knowledge involves having a justified true belief. — Bartricks
1 Knowledge should work all of the time, not some of the time.
2 Knowledge is useful.
3 Knowledge answers questions
4 Knowledge solves problems.
5 Knowledge is made of facts.
6 Facts are true
7 Facts are true because they are useful, answer questions, solve problems. — ovdtogt
Typically a justified belief, to the best of my knowledge, is one that can be and/or has been argued for. Traditionally, the justification of one's beliefs involved offering the ground; the basis for belief. I mean, I'm fairly certain that the justification method was invoked as a means to further discriminate between conflicting knowledge claims. — creativesoul
The person believes that a broken clock is correct. That belief is false. It also serves as ground for the subsequent belief regarding what time it is. So the belief about the time is not well-grounded. It is based upon false belief. — creativesoul
Typically a justified belief, to the best of my knowledge, is one that can be and/or has been argued for. Traditionally, the justification of one's beliefs involved offering the ground; the basis for belief. I mean, I'm fairly certain that the justification method was invoked as a means to further discriminate between conflicting knowledge claims.
— creativesoul
I am using 'justified' far more broadly to mean just 'a belief that there is a normative reason for the person to believe'. So that it includes beliefs that have not been inferred. Some of those are, I think, correctly described as 'justified'. After all, inferences have to proceed from some beliefs and those beliefs cannot themselves have been inferred, yet we do not - presumably - want to say that all such beliefs are unjustified. So I would say that a belief is justified just if there is a normative reason for the person to believe it, a reason they may well be unaware of. — Bartricks
On second thought, the term "normative" could be problematic. That would amount to agreement with conventional standards. All paradigm shift begins with rejecting convention somewhere along the line. So... I'm unsettled about the normative aspect. — creativesoul
Okay, so a 'well grounded' belief is one that is in some sense 'based' on a true belief? — Bartricks
For example, let's say I know full well that I am in a town in which all but one clock has stopped. I see a clock. I believe that the clock is working. That belief is clearly unjustified. But it happens to be true — Bartricks
normative reason is a reason to do or believe something. — Bartricks
But it doesn't matter. It's not justified. The problems for JTB, if there are any, need to be clear cut examples of justified(well-grounded) true belief. An unjustified true belief is not. — creativesoul
Warrant?
What counts as sufficient/adequate reason to believe? — creativesoul
It's not justified. The problems for JTB, if there are any, need to be clear cut examples of justified(well-grounded) true belief. An unjustified true belief is not.
— creativesoul
yes, but with that example I was refuting the theory that knowledge is well-grounded true belief... — Bartricks
I was giving a definition of a normative reason. — Bartricks
By offering another kind of knowledge which is also unjustified? — creativesoul
Bertrand Russell came up with a counterexample, one of kind made more famous later by Edmund Gettier (and that have subsequently become known as 'Gettier cases'). In Russell's case, a clock has stopped and is reporting a time of 3pm. Someone ignorant of the fact the clock has stopped but desirous to know the time looks at the clock and forms the belief that it is 3pm. By pure coincidence it is, in fact, 3pm. This person has a justified true belief. They belief that it is 3pm, and it is 3pm - so their belief is true. And their belief is justified because they have formed it in an epistemically responsible manner - they looked at a clock, a clock it was reasonble to assume was working. However, though they have a justified true belief that it is 3pm, it seems equally clear to our reason (the reason of most of us, anyway) that they do not 'know' that it is 3pm. — OP
By what authority do you claim time is not an abstract concept and therefore can not be known? — Athena
I do not think those are the same question. The latter has as no definitive answer - it would be like asking me why I find delicious what I find delicious (it varies) - but is also irrelevant to the question at issue. The question at issue is what knowledge is, not why it exists. — Bartricks
As for the former question - well, our reason is our source of insight into what Reason approves of.
Take the Gettier cases mentioned earlier. It used to be thought that possession of a justified true belief was sufficient for knowledge. But then Gettier cases are brought to our attention. And, for most of us, it is clear enough to our reason that the subject in a Gettier case lacks knowledge even though they possess a justified true belief. Now, that isn't arbitrary - people are not just randomly deciding, on the basis of nothing at all, that the subject in a Gettier case lacks knowledge. No, their reason tells them that the subject in that case lacks knowledge. — Bartricks
So Reason has no reasons, as it were. She is inscrutable. — Andrew M
It seems that you regard human reason as a kind of intuition or feeling that derives (however imperfectly) from Reason. Through a glass darkly, so to speak. — Andrew M
Get involved in philosophical discussions about knowledge, truth, language, consciousness, science, politics, religion, logic and mathematics, art, history, and lots more. No ads, no clutter, and very little agreement — just fascinating conversations.