H2 Knowledge and Inquiry Summary

H2 Knowledge and Inquiry Summary   Prepared by Quince Pan (17A15)     Dear reader,     I tried to be as comprehensive as I could in my coverage   of the topics, but when the philosophy gets too dense   and deep, I stopped following it down the rabbit hole.   The pursuit of knowledge is best done when sanity is   preserved. For the A-Levels, this should be enough.     All the best!     Quince :D         Youth should be awed, possessed, as with a sense   Religious, of what holy joy there is   In knowledge if it be sincerely sought   For its own sake — in glory, and in praise,   If but by labour won, and to endure.     William Wordsworth   The Prelude ​ (1805)       Basic Epistemology   https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/epistemology/   Definition of   knowledge   Justified, True Belief (JTB)   or Power, if you are Foucault   Sources of   knowledge   Perception, Reason, Introspection, Memory, Testimony   Theories of truth   Correspondence Theory of Truth   A belief is true if it corresponds to reality.   Problems:   ● Taking one step back: is the correspondence theory (a belief is true if it   corresponds to reality) true? If yes, what in reality does it correspond to?   ● Ethical statements don’t correspond to any fact. They are values.     Coherence Theory of Truth   A belief is true if it fits in a consistent web of beliefs.   Problems:   ● A belief can cohere with other beliefs and yet have no real evidence to support it.     Pragmatic Theory of Truth (William James)   A belief is considered true if it enables us to make accurate predictions of the future   experiences. Seeking correspondent truth is futile, so this is the best bet.   Problems:   ● Unreasonable beliefs can work. Pragmatism ignores causation, so coincidences   can be truths. (e.g. Every Tuesday, a bird shits on a rubbish bin. Also, the trash   gets cleared every Tuesday. The belief that “the trash is magically cleared   because the bird shits on the rubbish bin” works as an explanation.)   ● Past scientific paradigms “worked”, but have since been disproven.     Instrumentalist Theory of Truth (John Dewey)   A belief is true if it is useful and fecund.   Problems:   ● Effectively, truth is replaced by utility.

● Knowledge is a means to an end, not an end in itself.   Gettier problem   Edmund Gettier (1963)   The Gettier problem is a major challenge to JTB and internalist theories of justification.     Bertrand Russell’s Broken Clock (1948)   A clock ran out of battery and stopped at 12:15 pm. One week later, coincidentally also at   12:15 pm, someone looked at the clock, and concluded that it is 12:15 pm now (which is   actually true). Does this person know that it is 12:15 pm by looking at the broken clock?     Attempts to resolve the Gettier problem:   ● JTB+X definitions of knowledge   ● JTB, with externalist justification   ● Fallibilism: justification is impossible   Theories of   justification   Agrippa’s Trilemma   All justification has one of the following problems:   1. Circularity   2. Regression (practically indefensible)   3. Axiomaticity (rests on base assumptions and is not inherently truth-conducive)     Internalism   Justification is mind-dependent. Using our minds alone, we can have justification.   Justification requires only factors inside us.   ● S ​ ’s belief that ​ p ​ is justified if and only if ​ S ​ knows that it is justified.     Coherentism: ​ ​ Solves the circular problem by claiming that coherence (circularity) is   acceptable justification.   ● Problems: ​ ​ Closed paradigm. What if one belief is false or poorly justified?     Infinitism: ​ ​ Solves the regressive problem by claiming that a possible infinite chain of valid   justification is a sufficient condition for the justification of the final belief.   ● Problems: ​ ​ How do we know this chain is infinite? What if one segment of the   chain is poorly justified?     Foundationalism: ​ ​ Solves the axiomatic problem by claiming that some propositions are   self-evidently true.   ● Problems: ​ ​ What beliefs are self-evidently true? Are there any?     Externalism   Justification is mind-independent. Justification requires other factors outside us.   ● S ​ ’s belief that ​ p ​ can be justified even if ​ S ​ does not know that it is justified.     Externalist theories of justification prioritise truth-conduciveness (likely to give the truth).     Causal Theory (Alvin Goldman): ​ ​ A belief is justified if it is the result of a causal chain.     ● Problems: ​ ​ How do we determine such causal chains? Challenged by fallibilism,   Hume and Gettier.     Reliabilism (Alvin Goldman): ​ ​ A belief is justified if it is the result of a reliable process. The   criterion of a direct causal chain is loosened, making a reliable process sufficient.   ● Problems: ​ ​ Still cannot circumvent Gettier. Too vague and loose.

Scepticism and   fallibilism   Scepticism, being a much stronger claim, implies fallibilism. The contrapositive also holds.     Scepticism   Nothing is known   ⇒   Fallibilism   Nothing is certain   Infallibilism   Something is certain   ⇒   Common-sensism   Something is known     Rationalism and   empiricism   Rationalism: all knowledge is ​ ​ a priori   ● Relies on coherent truths   ● Examples: mathematics, logic     René Descartes   ● Cogito ergo sum. ​ / I think, therefore I am.   ● Evil demon / brain in a vat   ○ Even if my thoughts are manipulated by an evil demon, I can still think,   therefore my mind exists.     Problems of rationalism   ● Limited knowledge of the outside world.   ● Quine: even logic and maths is empirical.   ● May lead to scepticism, thence solipsism.     Empiricism: all knowledge is ​ ​ a posteriori   ● Relies on correspondent truths   ● Example: science, any knowledge about the real world   ● Relations of ideas are ​ a priori ​ , but they are pointless in the real world   ● http://philosophycourse.info/lecsite/lec-berke.html   ● https://prezi.com/e-am2kufodsw/empiricism-locke-berkeley-hume/     John Locke   ● All ideas, even mathematical and logical ones stem from experience.   ● Primary qualities = measurable physical properties   Secondary quantities = taste, smell, colour, etc.   ● Primary qualities are mind-independent, secondary qualities are mind-dependent.     George Berkeley   ● Esse est percipi. ​ / To be is to be perceived.   ● There are no actual objects, just bundles of sense data (minds and the ideas they   perceive)   ● All qualities are mind-dependent.     David Hume   ● Hume’s fork: relations of ideas ( ​ a priori ​ ) vs. matters of fact and existence ( ​ a   posteriori ​ )   ● Causation cannot be empirically observed.     Problems of empiricism   ● Fallibility of the senses   ● Sellars’ myth of the given   (foundational belief of empiricism: perception is presuppositionless)   ● Scepticism (brain in a vat)

Perception   Direct realism (common sense)   Mind → object     Representative realism (Locke) a.k.a. indirect realism, epistemological dualism   Mind → sense datum ← object     Object directly causes sense data.     Idealism (Berkeley)   Mind → perceptions     Experiencing sense data doesn’t imply that objects cause it.   Objects don’t exist, only ideas do.     To be is to be perceived. Only minds and ideas exist in the world, hence the term “idealism”. Even if the mind   does not perceive the object, the object still exists, as God is permanently observing it. (As a concession,   instead of plainly denying the existence of objects.)     Phenomenalism (Kant)   Mind → perceptions ⇒ object     Objects exists in the noumenal world, which is inaccessible to us because humans can   only access the phenomenal world.     Synthetic ​ a priori ​ ⇒ we are all born with “sunglasses”, and must see the world through   them ⇒ phenomena vs. noumena     Even if the mind does not perceive the object, the object still exists as possible experiences.   Processes of   reasoning       formal integrity?   formal integrity ✅   true premises