Knowledge Tree
Relations (1)
related 6.43 — strongly supporting 85 facts
Knowledge and justification are central, interrelated concepts in epistemology, often analyzed together to determine the conditions for belief [1], [2]. Many epistemological theories, such as virtue epistemology, attempt to define or replace these terms [3], [4], [5], while others, like those of Jaegwon Kim, argue that knowledge cannot exist without justification [6].
Facts (85)
Sources
Epistemology | Internet Encyclopedia of Philosophy iep.utm.edu 12 facts
claimMemory allows individuals to retain knowledge from the past even if the original justification for that knowledge is forgotten.
claimThe 'no-false-belief' condition is insufficient to define knowledge because an individual can hold a justified, true belief that is not based on false beliefs but still fails to qualify as knowledge.
claimThe Gettier problem demonstrates that it is possible for a belief to be both justified and true, yet still fail to constitute knowledge because the truth of the belief relies on luck.
claimIn typical instances of knowledge, the factors responsible for the justification of a belief are also responsible for its truth, such as when a properly functioning clock provides both justification and truth for a belief about the time.
claimKnowledge can be transmitted between individuals through testimony, where a person's justification for a belief is based on a trusted source confirming its truth.
claimIn epistemology, a belief must be both true and justified to constitute knowledge.
claimThe 'no-false-belief' condition proposes that for a belief to constitute knowledge, it must be true, justified, and formed without relying on any false beliefs.
claimTo constitute knowledge, a belief must be both true and justified.
claimRoderick Chisholm was one of the first authors to provide a systematic analysis of knowledge, and his account of justification is classified as foundationalist.
claimThe 'no-defeaters' condition defines knowledge as a belief that is true, justified, and lacks any 'defeaters' to that justification.
claimKnowledge requires not only true belief but also that the belief be formed in the 'right way', which is referred to as justification.
claimThe requirement for justification in knowledge does not necessitate absolute certainty, as humans are fallible beings.
Virtue Epistemology | Internet Encyclopedia of Philosophy iep.utm.edu 11 facts
perspectiveJonathan Kvanvig proposes an epistemological perspective that prioritizes the social and cross-temporal dimensions of cognitive life over questions regarding the nature and limits of knowledge and justification.
claimThe author asserts that the exercise of intellectual virtue is not a necessary condition for knowledge or justification.
claimVirtue reliabilism and virtue responsibilism are not necessarily incompatible, as a virtue reliabilist can hold that a faculty-based approach is most promising for questions concerning the nature of knowledge and justification, while still maintaining that there are substantive epistemological questions to be pursued regarding the character traits that interest virtue responsibilists.
claimVirtue responsibilism faces a difficulty as an analysis of knowledge or justification because knowledge and justification are often acquired passively, making few demands on the character of the cognitive agent.
claimLorraine Code claims that an adequate conception of intellectual virtues cannot be achieved through standard methodologies of contemporary epistemology, which she believes are too narrow and overemphasize abstract doxastic properties like knowledge and justification.
perspectiveLorraine Code's epistemological view prioritizes the value of virtuous cognitive character, the social and moral dimensions of intellectual life, and the role of agency in inquiry, rather than offering a definition of knowledge or justification.
claimVirtue reliabilist accounts of knowledge and justification are versions of epistemological externalism, which may prove unsatisfying to those with internalist sympathies.
claimVirtue reliabilist accounts of knowledge and justification are versions of epistemological externalism, as they deny that the factors grounding one's justification must be cognitively accessible from one's first-person or internal perspective.
claimLinda Zagzebski's analysis of knowledge defines knowledge as belief arising from acts of intellectual virtue, rather than true belief, because the justification or warrant condition entails the truth condition.
claimThe author argues that if virtue concepts are not central to an analysis of knowledge or justification, it is difficult to defend the claim that intellectual virtues have epistemological importance.
claimVirtue reliabilists primarily focus on providing a virtue-based account of knowledge or justification, whereas virtue responsibilists often pursue different and less traditional epistemological projects.
Epistemology - Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy plato.stanford.edu 10 facts
claimExternalists argue that animals and small children possess knowledge and justified beliefs, which they claim cannot be justified in the way evidentialists conceive of justification.
accountIn the 'barn-facades' thought experiment, Henry drives through a rural area filled with barn facades that look like real barns, but he happens to look at the one and only real barn and forms the belief that there is a barn there. While his belief is justified by his visual experience (according to TK) or by the reliable cognitive process of vision (according to NTK), it is widely agreed by epistemologists that Henry's belief does not qualify as knowledge because it is true merely by luck; had he looked at a facade, he would have formed the same belief.
claimSome Non-traditional knowledge (NTK) theorists bypass the justification condition entirely by conceiving of knowledge as reliably produced true belief, rendering justification unnecessary.
claimA moderate version of naturalistic epistemology aims to identify how knowledge and justification are anchored in the natural world, similar to how physics explains natural phenomena like heat or thunder.
claimThe traditional approach to knowledge (TK) asserts that knowledge requires justification to ensure that a subject's correct belief is not merely a matter of luck.
claimCoherentism characterizes knowledge and justification as a structure resembling a web, where the strength of any specific area depends on the strength of the surrounding areas.
claimFoundationalism characterizes knowledge and justification as a structure resembling a building, where a superstructure rests upon a foundation of basic beliefs.
claimReliabilism asserts that justification is not necessary for knowledge, and that reliably produced true belief is sufficient for knowledge, provided the notion of reliability is refined to rule out Gettier cases.
claimExternalists assert that justification requires external conditions because those conditions provide the objective probability necessary for knowledge.
claimReliabilism exists in two forms: as a theory of justification, which views justification as an important ingredient of knowledge grounded in reliability, and as a theory of knowledge, which defines knowledge as reliably produced true belief without requiring justification.
Epistemology of Testimony | Internet Encyclopedia of Philosophy iep.utm.edu 9 facts
quoteJennifer Lackey (2005) states: “non–reductionists maintain that testimony is just as basic a source of justification (knowledge, warrant, entitlement, and so forth) as sense-perception, memory, inference, and the like”.
claimTestimonial liberals who require evidence of reliability for knowledge or justification face an argument that they must also concede that lacking evidence of reliability results in a lack of knowledge or justification.
claimLaurence BonJour (1980, 2003) argues that if one accepts that knowledge or justification is defeated by evidence of unreliability or contrary evidence, one must also accept that it is defeated by a lack of evidence regarding the reliability of the source.
claimThe epistemology of testimonially-based belief concerns the epistemic status of a subject's belief, specifically evaluating whether the belief is justified, rational, warranted, supported by evidence, or constitutes knowledge.
claimRobert Audi (1997) is demanding regarding testimonially-based justification but lenient regarding testimonially-based knowledge because he does not consider justification a requirement for knowledge.
claimEpistemology involves assigning statuses such as 'knowledge' or 'justification' to beliefs based on whether those beliefs meet specific epistemic standards.
claimTestimonial liberals who accept that a subject lacks justification or knowledge when they have evidence that a proposition is false or that a source is unreliable should also concede that the subject lacks knowledge or justification when they have no evidence that the source is reliable.
referenceGreen (2007) defends an approach to knowledge or justification that imposes a no-defeater requirement but not a positive-reasons-to-believe-in-reliability condition, using the legal handling of fraud cases as an analogy.
claimSome epistemologists are skeptical of the 'fake barn case,' arguing that these cases do not clearly demonstrate a failure of justification or knowledge.
Understanding epistemology and its key approaches in research cefcambodia.com 9 facts
claimFallibilists argue that the possibility of a justification being false does not necessarily mean the belief itself is false, and that knowledge can exist without certainty.
accountPritchard (2018) provides the example of Harry, who forms a belief about which horse will win a race based on which horse's name appeals to him; even if the horse wins and the belief is true, Harry did not 'know' the outcome because the belief was not formed through appropriate justification.
claimThe key components of knowledge are identified as truth, belief, and justification.
perspectivePritchard (2018) posits that for a true belief to become knowledge, it must be justified, meaning the believer must have good reasons to think that what they believe is true.
claimSteup (2010) identifies justification as a key component required to transform a true belief into knowledge.
claimRescher (2003) asserts that knowledge is not simply a matter of having a true belief that is somehow justified, but must be appropriately justified.
accountRescher (2003) illustrates the problem of justification with an example: A person believes Smith is in London (which is false, as Smith is in Manchester), and because Smith being in London entails Smith being in England, the person believes Smith is in England; while the belief is true, the person does not 'know' Smith is in England because the justification is false.
referenceMoser (2009) defines epistemology as the study of the nature of knowledge and justification, specifically regarding defining components, substantive conditions or sources, and the limits of knowledge and justification.
claimSufficient epistemic support from non-memorial grounds is required as a means of justification for a memory-based belief to be considered knowledge.
Epistemology - Wikipedia en.wikipedia.org 5 facts
claimEpistemologists study the concepts of belief, truth, and justification to understand the nature of knowledge.
claimEpistemologists often identify justification as a key component of knowledge.
claimEpistemological disagreements often stem from disputes about the nature and function of foundational concepts, such as the definition of knowledge and the role of justification.
claimEpistemologists investigate sources of justification, including perception, introspection, memory, reason, and testimony, to discover how knowledge arises.
claimPhilosophers have proposed various alternative definitions of knowledge to address counterexamples, including requirements that the known fact must cause the belief in the right way, that the belief must be the product of a reliable belief formation process, that the person would not have the belief if it were false, that the belief is not inferred from a falsehood, that the justification cannot be undermined, or that the belief is infallible.
What Is Epistemology? Pt. 3: The Nature of Justification and Belief philosimplicity.com 4 facts
claimThe Justified True Belief (JTB) theory, also known as the standard analysis, defines knowledge as consisting of three components: justification, truth, and belief.
claimMost epistemologists conclude that known things cannot be false because knowledge requires that beliefs be both justified and true.
claimFallibilism does not assert that beliefs are wrong or that true knowledge is impossible, but rather that absolute certainty regarding the nature of justifications in relation to the knowledge they provide is unattainable.
claimEpistemological positions are not mutually exclusive; for example, an individual can be an externalist regarding knowledge while being an internalist regarding justification, or simultaneously a fallibilist and a foundationalist.
Naturalized Epistemology - Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy plato.stanford.edu 4 facts
claimPhilosophers utilize various principles to assess knowledge and justification, including inference to the best explanation, principles about coherence, and the conservation of belief.
claimJaegwon Kim argues that Willard Van Orman Quine's naturalized epistemology studies a different topic than traditional epistemology, specifically shifting focus from questions of rationality, justification, and knowledge to the causal connections between sensory evidence and beliefs.
claimThe debate between naturalists and non-naturalists can be understood as a disagreement over whether knowledge and justification can be defined using naturalistically acceptable causal and reliabilist terms or if they require naturalistically suspect evaluative terms.
claimTraditional epistemologists debate whether knowledge and justification require conclusive reasons, strong reasons, or if they rely on factors like reliability, causal connectedness, explanatory power, or wide acceptance.
Epistemic Justification – Introduction to Philosophy: Epistemology press.rebus.community 4 facts
claimThe Agrippan trilemma, also known as the regress problem, is a first-century argument for global skepticism about justification and knowledge, attributed to the philosopher Agrippa.
claimTruth is a requirement for knowledge, but it is a distinct requirement from justification; one cannot know a proposition to be true if that proposition is false.
claimAgrippa, a first-century Pyrrhonist philosopher, proposed an argument for global skepticism about justification and knowledge based on the structure of reasons.
claimAgrippa's trilemma is an argument put forward by the first-century Pyrrhonist philosopher Agrippa for global skepticism about justification and knowledge.
Virtue Epistemology - Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy plato.stanford.edu 3 facts
claimConventional virtue epistemology (VE) utilizes the resources of virtue epistemology to address standard questions in contemporary Anglophone epistemology, such as providing analyses or definitions of knowledge and justification, solving puzzles like the Gettier problem and the lottery problem, constructing counterexamples, and confronting the skeptic.
claimA Gettier case is constructed by starting with a belief that meets the justification condition for knowledge, adding an element of bad luck that would normally prevent the belief from being true, and adding a dose of good luck that cancels out the bad luck so the belief ends up true.
claimPhilosophers including Axtell & Carter (2008), McDowell (1994), Roberts & Wood (2007), and Zagzebski (1996, 2009) argue that epistemological terms like 'knowledge', 'evidence', 'justification', 'duty', and 'virtue' cannot be adequately defined or fully explained in purely non-normative vocabulary.
Epistemological Problems of Testimony plato.stanford.edu 2 facts
Virtue epistemology - Wikipedia en.wikipedia.org 2 facts
claimVirtue epistemologists distinguish between 'eliminative' virtue epistemology, which replaces traditional concepts like knowledge and justification with intellectual virtue and vice, and 'non-eliminative' virtue epistemology, which retains traditional concepts while using virtue to provide a substantive explanation of them.
perspectiveJonathan Kvanvig argues that true belief is sufficient to maximize truth and avoid error, suggesting that justification should be dropped from the equation of knowledge.
Naturalized epistemology - Wikipedia en.wikipedia.org 2 facts
claimJaegwon Kim argues that modern epistemology is defined by the normative concepts of justification and reliability, and that removing these concepts eliminates the common sense meaning of knowledge.
quoteJaegwon Kim asserts that the defining characteristic of an epistemological study is the notion of justification, stating: "If justification drops out of epistemology, knowledge itself drops out of epistemology."
Social Epistemology - Open Encyclopedia of Cognitive Science oecs.mit.edu 2 facts
claimEpistemology is defined as the study of knowledge and related phenomena, including attitudes like belief and trust, attributes like justification and reliability, and intellectual traits such as humility or arrogance.
claimCandidates for the additional feature required to transform true belief into knowledge include justification (the ability to provide a reason), warrant (being well-positioned to know, such as through training or pattern recognition), and accuracy that manifests epistemic virtue (expressing reliable dispositions like good memory).
7.1 What Epistemology Studies - Introduction to Philosophy | OpenStax openstax.org 2 facts
claimUnderstanding the process of conceptual analysis is essential for following debates in epistemological theorizing regarding knowledge and justification.
claimEpistemology is defined as the study of knowledge, focusing on what knowledge is, the types of knowledge that exist, the possibility and nature of justification, the sources of beliefs, and the nature of truth.
Basic epistemology and justification of true beliefs? : r/askphilosophy reddit.com 1 fact
claimIn the Standard View of knowledge, justification is a necessary component for something to be considered knowledge.
Social Epistemology – Introduction to Philosophy - Rebus Press press.rebus.community 1 fact
claimCollective epistemology investigates the conditions under which the beliefs of groups can be considered justified or knowledge, given that groups are often spoken of as having intentions and beliefs.
Virtue epistemology - Routledge Encyclopedia of Philosophy rep.routledge.com 1 fact
claimSome virtue epistemology theories propose that traditional concepts of justification or knowledge can be analyzed in terms of intellectual virtue, while others argue that traditional concepts are defective or uninteresting and should be replaced by the notion of intellectual virtue.
Understanding Epistemology and Justified True Belief - Quizlet quizlet.com 1 fact
claimKnowledge is defined as Justified True Belief (JTB), which requires three components: belief, truth, and justification.