Name Philosophy 21 October 2013 True-Justified-Belief Theory of Knowledge According to Audi, knowledge results from encounters, it materializes based on contemplation, progresses by means of interpretation and deduction, and displays a characteristic structure (n.p.)…
For example, if person X sees person Y seating alone at a table in a restaurant and guesses that he is waiting for his wife, while he could be waiting for anyone else from a business partner to a relative or an old friend, he could also be just having a meal by himself. If this proposition is based on a wild guess, even if person Y does turn out to be waiting for his wife given that she arrives a while later, this does not amount to knowledge on the part of person X. When what appears to be knowledge lacks truth, it cannot be considered to be knowledge. It therefore holds that knowledge as a minimum is true belief (Audi n.p.) This further raises the question of whether knowing something means “justifiedly” believing it (Audi n.p.). As in the case above, simply guessing that person Y is waiting for his wife, even in the event that it turns out to be true does not constitute knowledge on the part of person X. This is because there is no justification for it. However, assuming that person Z tells person X that he has seen person Y wait for his wife at that restaurant at the same time every day for a period of time, this could justify person X’s true belief that indeed person Y is waiting for his wife. Person X’s acquisition of knowledge that person Y is waiting for his wife can be rationalized by his acquisition of evidence that justifies the true belief that he indeed is (Audi n.p.). Additionally, Audi contends that the more evidence people acquire to support their belief in something and build up their justification of the particular belief, the nearer they get to knowledge (n.p.). This backs the view that justified belief is a facet of knowledge. From the above, Audi states that it can be deduced that there is a practical and considerable condition necessary for knowledge, that is based on three elements; one knows something only if one believes in it, it is true and the belief that one has of that particular thing is justifiable. In particular; as a minimum, knowledge is justified true belief (Audi n.p.). This sums up the theory of true-justified-belief of knowledge. However, there are sufficient conditions provided for in the analysis of what constitutes knowledge. This is because, despite the fact that I only know something, if I truly and “justifiedly” believe in it, it does not hold that, if I truly and “justifiedly” believe in something, then I know it (Audi n.p.). This three-way analysis of knowledge according to O’Brien infers that the three conditions are necessary for knowledge, that is; belief, truth and justification (11). The conditions are also jointly sufficient for knowledge meaning that one has knowledge when the three conditions are met. Necessary and sufficient conditions are connected to conditional statements conveying the truth of two suggestions in the form “If X then Y” (Lacewing 24). The assertion in this case is that if proposition X is true then proposition Y is also true. In the event that the assertion is true, it follows that proposition X is true, then proposition Y is true. It also follows that if proposition Y is false then proposition X is also false. The theory of true-justified-belief of knowledge therefore holds that when the three conditions it proposes are met, together they are sufficient and nothing else is needed for knowledge (Lacewing 24). However, it also contends that if you know X then you have a justified true be ...
Cite this document
(“Explain the true-justified-belief theory of knowledge Essay”, n.d.)
Retrieved from https://studentshare.net/philosophy/105624-explain-the-true-justified-belief-theory-of
(Explain the True-Justified-Belief Theory of Knowledge Essay)
“Explain the True-Justified-Belief Theory of Knowledge Essay”, n.d. https://studentshare.net/philosophy/105624-explain-the-true-justified-belief-theory-of.
The author defines the knowledge as the acquaintance of facts, tenets and truths from a study or investigation or as acquaintance of facts and truths from experience. This definition leads him to conclude that theory of knowledge is a justified true belief. He discusses knowledge from a propositional point of view.
Toward this end, the focus of this discussion will be directed toward understanding the notion of belief in connection with what the author of Epistemology by Robert Audi (2003) this book claims about the argument from ‘acquaintance’ argument, and in turn, the argument which maintains that perception is a form of knowledge, although indefensible as a form of valid knowledge.
The objective is not to learn new information but to know the process of recalling and eliciting awareness that we already have. Plato emphasizes that true knowledge of virtue is attainable through appropriate ways and methods. Plato states that true belief coupled with rationality is knowledge and a true belief not motivated by a rational account is not knowledge.
What more should there be that JTB is still being doubted as knowledge? Yet this century old philosophical question remains controversial until today. It seems a question with thousand answers, as it is perceived from different perspectives. In fact, understanding contending philosophical viewpoints on JTB is simply amusing and without holding on to basics of truth, one would most likely end-up confused rather than enlightened.
es more sense. Hence this can be classified as justified true belief. Knowledge is basically a belief or conviction that someone has in something or a thing. However, knowledge can be enhanced by a combination of reason and experience. In order for human mind to make a belief that is dependable or reliable, there has to be substantive evidence on it.
The view of the theory is that, in the case where a person believes in a given proposition (p), then they can know that the proposition (p) is true; only in the case that the proposition in question is truthful; the subject holds the belief that the proposal is truthful, and that the subject (S) can use a justification or offer a justification that their belief in the proposal (p) is true (Schaffer 73-75).
One such, Bertrand Russell, points out that tradition has led man to think of belief as a "state of mind". He concedes that behaviouralists, who do not believe in states of mind, would offer the alternate definition of belief as "a characteristic of bodily behaviour" 1.
the other hand, empiricism states that human knowledge is based on experience or posteriori knowledge Many people have argued that human knowledge originate from experience but it is more sensible to argue that neither side can be neglected instead, what need to be done is that
y scholars have tried to delve on the philosophical analysis of the nature of knowledge and how knowledge contribute towards notions such as beliefs, truths, and justification (BonJour pp. 4).
Arguably, epistemology can be defined as the philosophical study of knowledge and
2 Pages(500 words)Essay
GOT A TRICKY QUESTION? RECEIVE AN ANSWER FROM STUDENTS LIKE YOU!
Let us find you another Essay on topic Explain the true-justified-belief theory of knowledge for FREE!