Knowledge. Internalism and Externalism

Transcription

1 Knowledge Internalism and Externalism

2 What is Knowledge? Uncontroversially: Knowledge implies truth S knows that it s Monday > it s Monday Almost as uncontroversially: Knowledge is a kind of belief S knows that it s Monday > S believes that it s Monday

3 Internalism How to distinguish knowledge from other mental states (belief, desire, hope, doubt, etc.)? Internalism: in terms of truth and the character of the state itself and Its relations to other mental states Knowledge = justified true belief

4 Justification Beliefs may be justified: Intrinsically: self-justifying, self-evident Inferentially: following from other justified beliefs Justification is transparent to the knower: if you are justified, you [can] know it KK thesis: if you know, you [can] know that you know

5 Externalism To distinguish knowledge form other mental states, We must invoke relations between mental states and the world Knowledge = true belief formed by a reliable process of belief formation Not necessarily transparent to knower

6 Internalism: Plato Knowledge = true belief? But a belief might be true accidentally Knowledge = justified true belief, belief with an account

7 Justified true belief Theaetetus. That is a distinction, Socrates, which I have heard made by some one else, but I had forgotten it. He said that true opinion, combined with reason, was knowledge, but that the opinion which had no reason was out of the sphere of knowledge; and that things of which there is no rational account are not knowable--such was the singular expression which he used--and that things which have a reason or explanation are knowable.

8 Foundationalism You can know something only if you can justify your belief, that is, explain why it must be true Your explanation must rely on other things you know You must have explanations of them in terms of priori things you know Regress stops: there must be a foundation of basic items ( the given ) known directly

9 Plato s Dilemma for the Given If knowledge rests on a foundation of basic items, do we know them? If not, how can knowledge rest on the unknown? If so, how can they be justified and yet basic?

10 Plato s Argument If knowledge is justified true belief, it has a foundation justifying everything else Items in the foundation are not justified But they are known more directly than anything else So, knowledge is not justified true belief

11 Three Options Coherentism: knowledge has no foundation; there is no given, no level of ultimate justifiers Self-evidence: the given justify themselves Direct realism: sensations can justify knowledge without being knowledge

12 Indian Externalism Two Hindu darshanas, Nyaya (logic) and Vaisesika (particularism), merged around 1000 in the work of Udayana Proponents are Nyayayikas Earliest work: Nyaya-sutra, by Gautama (200)

13 Pramanas Pramana = means (source) of knowledge Perception Inference Analogy Reliable testimony Knowledge is true belief produced by a reliable means of knowledge (pramana)

14 Perception Perception is synthetic, veridical, and definite Sutra 4: Perception is the cognition resulting from sense-object contact [and which is] 'not due to words', 'invariably related' [to the object] and is 'of a definite character'.

15 Analogy We use analogy, especially in knowing language Sutra 6: Comparison is the instrument of the valid knowledge of an object derived through its similarity with another well-known object.

16 Testimony Sutra 7: Verbal testimony is the communication from a 'trustworthy person'. Bhasya: A trustworthy person is the speaker who has the direct knowledge of an object and is motivated by the desire of communicating the object as directly known by him.

17 Inference Sutra 5: Next [is discussed] inference, which is preceded by it [i.e., by perception], and is of three kinds, namely, inferring the effect (i.e. having the antecedent as the probans), inferring the cause (i.e. having the consequent as the probans) and inferring the rule (i.e. where the general law is ascertained by general observation).

18 Kinds of inference Inferring the effect We know cause (e.g., lightning) We expect effect (e.g., thunder) Inferring the cause We know effect (e.g., thunder) We infer the cause (e.g., lightning) Inferring the rule We know instances and generalize (e.g., lightning causes thunder)