"Your beliefs are your map of reality. They guide you though the day. They are the sense through which you perceive the world… …We want our beliefs to be true, to connect us to reality, to clue us in on what’s really happening in our world, and in our own lives. We don’t want our most important beliefs to be mere opinions; we want them to constitute real knowledge. But what is knowledge?" (Philosophy for Dummies, p41, 44)
He then offers this answer:
"…Our concept of knowledge is first of all an attainment concept. In basketball, we shoot in order to score. Shooting is the activity; scoring is the attainment intended. In the life of the mind, we believe in order to know. Believing is, in a sense, the activity; knowing is the intended attainment. Just as you can shoot a basketball and not score a basket, you can believe something and not thereby have knowledge. So knowing is not the same as believing. What then in fact is it? Philosophers have a traditional analysis of knowledge that says, KNOWLEDGE = PROPERLY JUSTIFIED TRUE BELIEF…" (Philosophy for Dummies, p44-5)
(Take some time with today’s two handouts if you’d like to better understand what ‘properly justified true belief’ means in a philosophical sense).
Soooo…. Which of the following beliefs also qualify as 'knowledge' because they meet the necessary philosophical conditions?
Crystal C.
1. My name is Crystal.
2. It has been 14 years 3 months and 15 days since I was born.
3. The hair on my head is longer than my chin.
Ethan N.
1. You don’t know anything.
2. I don’t know anything.
3. Knowledge is a term people use to say something from their perspective.
4. Mr. B gives us questions that have no answers… everybody fails :P
Caitlyn
1. I know that I love my dog.
2. I know that I like to think.
3. Peanut Butter tastes good to me.
4. I know I don’t know the truth about reality.
5. I am forgetful.
Chris H.
1. I know that I am sitting in a chair.
2. I know that I am male.
3. I know I wear clothes.
4. I know my address… sometimes.
5. I know I like shiny objects.
Lindsey A.
1. The God of Abraham, Issac and Jacob exists.
2. Jesus Christ is Lord and Savior to those who accept him.
3. The human fetus is a human being therefore there is no justification for abortion if the mother’s life is not at risk.
Anthony N.
I know I know…
1. The properties I can sense in myself.
2. The properties I can sense in this paper.
3. The properties I can sense in the world.
4. The properties I can sense in my food.
5. The properties I can sense in the universe.
John C.
1. I know that my parents named me John.
2. Death.
3. I know that there are consequences to actions, because people lay them on each other.
4. Any thing man made is certain within the realm of humans.
Anonymous
[I know that] I don’t know.
Toeknee B.
1. Mr. Bousquet has brown hair.
2. This pen writes in black ink.
3. Ducks go "Quack Quack."
D.A.
1. [I know] my 123’s.
2. [I] know my friends are strange.
3. [I] know I’m crazy.
4. [I] know my name.
A.L.
[I know…]
1. my abc’s.
2. how to raise toddlers.
3. my mom lives with me.
4. Chris is weird.
Ashley S.
1. I know I have bad fashion.
2. I know my nickname is bubblez.
3. I know my name spells ans.
4. I know I’m not famous.
5. I know I love cats.
6. I know I love the colour blue.
7. I know people are different.
Mr. B.
1. I know that at the end of today's meeting, a student handed me a paper folded twice.
2. I know that the paper did not have a name on it.
2. I know that I assumed a certain student handed me that paper.
3. I know that certain student threw the paper away when I asked him about it.
4. I know that the statement "It’s not worth it" was written on that paper.
Soooo... do you have any beliefs--or knowledge to the contrary--in regard to the above statements?
4 comments:
I want to focus in on the religious comment. I know that it would be silly to believe in something you live your life by, and not say that you KNOW it, but is that really the case. Looking at the definition of 'know' as it is stated in Philosophy for Dummies, I don't think that that could hold true. It's funny when it comes to religion because if you can't say you know 100%, then your not really putting everything into it, but can anyone really know?
Also, Mr. B, could you please add me to the editor list?
AthePoutsiderC@gmail.com
Good points and good questions.
Science, which offers us beliefs that are often sold as 'fact' (REAL knowledge) seems to be frequently pitted against Religion/Faith, which offers us beliefs that are slandered as more flimsy (less than real knowledge).
But the more I think about it, each is a belief system with its own assumptions:
Science wants us to assume that substantial knowledge can only be obtained through our five senses. If Science can convince us of such, then it has cornered the market as the sole means to truth.
Religion on the other hand, wants us to believe that matters of ultimate reality must be taken on faith. Even though Religion has a flimsy reputation amongst many intellectuals, the more I think about it, the more it seems that faith is really the essence of all 'knowledge'.
Do any of us really KNOW anything, beyond all doubt? Are we, and our beliefs infalible? No, I don't think so. Instead, I think it's time that all of us, rationalists, scientists, atheits, and theists admit that we all live by faith.
That's not to say we are irrational. We must continue to rationally and emotionally seek out a deeper understanding of our existence, but at the same time, that effort will fall short of full-knowing... and the gap that's left is bridged by faith.
So what I wonder is, when we say we know something, what exactly is the 'faith' or object of faith that is filling all the gaps/holes in the theories that we hold on to as if they were infalible objective knowledge?
Do I put the most faith in my intellect? My senses? The *spiritual* voices I hear? What I read? Only my own experiences? What others tell me? What I simply want to believe, regardless of whether its realistic or not?
I must start by apologizing, because the comments that follow may seem needlessly picky… and perhaps they are. But if you hear me out, you may find some provocative questions worth exploring…
I noticed that Lindsey potentially misspelled a name when she wrote, “[I know that…] The God of Abraham, Issac and Jacob exists.” I assume, with much confidence, that she meant/intended, ““[I know that…] The God of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob exists.” Let me use this potential mistake to raise the question:
How correct/accurate/complete does a person have to be in order to be ‘right’, or in order to rightfully claim they have ‘knowledge’ of something/someone?
Now let me say again that I’m not trying to be a nitpicking nitwit… BUT… let’s assume that Linsdey got the name a little wrong… does that make her entire statement wrong? Does that make her belief wrong? Does that mean she does not have the knowledge she claims to have? During our discussion, she made the claim that absolute truth exists and THAT is the truth we should seek… does her mistake suggest that the external truth may be absolute, but it is impossible for any human to lay personal claim to have/understand any absolute truth in its entirety?
To take it a bit further, what does it mean to know someone or have knowledge of someone? (For those of you who are theists, you can think of that someone as God/Creator, and for those of you atheist/agnostics, you can just think of some other potential person.) Do you need to know ALL ABOUT or ALL OF someone to correctly claim that you know and/or have knowledge of them?
Many atheists have used this objection to say that no mortal/limited human could even begin to know an infinite being, as many theists postulate that the Creator/God is… How does a theist respond to this… do they claim to know a part of God… most of God… the essence of God? Can a person claim to know ALL of God? If a believer’s knowledge of God is anything less than complete, or contains even the smallest of errors (as Lindsey’s spelling included), is that error enough to disqualify their ‘claim to truly know’? When do these ‘errors’ become significant enough to disqualify their knowledge? Sure, Lindsey missed a couple letters in Isaac and most likely intended the historical Isaac. Would she admit that someone who calls God “Zeus” could be referring to the same person she calls Jesus? (Notice that Zeus and Jesus are off by just a few letters…)
God aside… can I—a married man—claim to know or have knowledge of my own wife? I am familiar with a lot of her habits, perspectives, thoughts, feelings, etc.. So does that mean I know her? I certainly don’t know her completely (she surprises me all the time)… but do I know her at all?
These are kind of spooky questions to ask, and can leave a person feeling very alone in the world/universe. (BTW, I feel that I know my wife in a very substantial, even ‘spiritual’ way, although I can’t back that up with a logical/rational argument at this time… )
One of my favorite quotes: Make it thy business to know thyself, which is the most difficult lesson in the world. -Cervantes
So… who do you know? Do you even know yourself? How do you know?
As Mr.B pointed out I did spell Isaac wrong(oops!)but the meaning still comes across clearly in this case. As for the comparision between the simlar spellings of Zeus and Jesus, I would like to point out that Jesus is the greek translation of the Hebrew name Yeshua, therefore there is no correlation or simularity between Zeus and Jesus.
There is a diffrence between knowing about someone or thing and actualy knowing them or it. For example I know about the president, but I really don't know him.I think that because we are human and therefore imperfect we can never really understand and fully comprhend the knowledge that we have, though we may be able to interpret it in our own ways.
Post a Comment