Your example is very consequential, thus a higher burden of justification is needed to claim something as knowledge. — PhilosophyRunner
allows us to make decisions in the face of uncertainty. That includes most decisions. In a related fashion, it allows us some control over the risks of decisions we make. — T Clark
How does adding "objective" and "absolute" help? — Banno
Your example is very consequential, thus a higher burden of justification is needed to claim something as knowledge. — PhilosophyRunner
This is not a question of fact, i.e knowledge, it is a question of values... — T Clark
I disagree. — T Clark
One might even claim that their pushing such a break between fact and value was intentional sophistry. — Banno
Are you really wanting to maintain that values do not have a truth value? — Banno
SO it's not true that I like vanilla, — Banno
Who shouldn't such sentence have truth values — Banno
That's exactly why I must insist upon at arriving at further justifications to substantiate my knowledge the election was stolen, else I'll have to submit to the authority of my nemesis.
This seems to celebrate confirmation bias as opposed to starting from the notion that there is a truth. — Hanover
What is the term you'd prefer to designate JTB if not "knowledge"? Let us use the word "tnow" for that. — Hanover
Because there is good justification, I have great confidence in this, but it is not direct access to metaphysical truth. — PhilosophyRunner
As I stated previously, knowledge is adequately justified belief. As to what JTB is...I guess I think it's meaningless, or at least useless. That's a position I've been pretty consistent about throughout my brilliant philosophical career here on the forum. — T Clark
Which, on your account, have no truth value... — Banno
My argument is that I cant directly "know" Metaphysical truth. — PhilosophyRunner
because I have justification and I believe it. — PhilosophyRunner
What is your justification that there is a truth independent of personal justification? — Hanover
Something’s truth does not require that anyone can know or prove that it is true. Not all truths are established truths. If you flip a coin and never check how it landed, it may be true that it landed heads, even if nobody has any way to tell. Truth is a metaphysical, as opposed to epistemological, notion: truth is a matter of how things are, not how they can be shown to be. — https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/knowledge-analysis/
This truth is what T in JTB refers to (as far as I understand - I am not an expert on the matter). So really you should be asking proponents of JTB that question. — PhilosophyRunner
My argument is that I cant directly "know" Metaphysical truth. That is absolute, objective truth. That is what is true regardless of what I think, regardless of what you think, regardless of what anyone thinks. — PhilosophyRunner
because I have justification and I believe it. — PhilosophyRunner
Knowledge is epistemology, yet JTB attempts to define it in terms of metaphysics. — PhilosophyRunner
I am arguing against the T in JBT. That is the T that we have been referring to here. — PhilosophyRunner
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.