Knowledge Tree
Relations (1)
related 4.17 — strongly supporting 17 facts
Belief is fundamentally linked to propositions as the object of cognitive attitudes, where 'belief-that' is defined as the acceptance of a proposition's truth [1]. Epistemological frameworks define knowledge and justification through the relationship between a subject's belief and the truth of a specific proposition {fact:1, fact:4, fact:6}, while doxastic attitudes like belief, disbelief, and suspension of judgment are explicitly categorized as stances taken toward a proposition {fact:3, fact:10}.
Facts (17)
Sources
Epistemic Justification – Introduction to Philosophy: Epistemology press.rebus.community 8 facts
claim'Belief-in' is a form of belief that does not require a proposition as its object and contains an affective component such as hope or trust, distinguishing it from the purely cognitive 'belief-that.'
claimIt is justified to suspend judgment on a proposition p when it is justified neither to believe p nor to disbelieve p.
claimHaving knowledge-level justification for believing a proposition does not require that the proposition is true, because justification for many common beliefs is consistent with the falsity of those propositions.
claimIn the context of the book 'Introduction to Philosophy: Epistemology', 'belief' refers to 'belief-that', which is defined as the acceptance of a proposition’s truth.
claimTo suspend judgment on a proposition p is to consider p yet neither believe nor disbelieve it, meaning one is undecided on whether p is true or false.
claimEpistemic justification functions as a knowledge-contributing link between a person and their belief that a proposition is true.
claimDoxastic attitudes, which are stances on the truth value of a proposition, include belief, disbelief, and suspension of judgment.
claimTo believe a proposition p is to think that p is true, meaning one thinks reality is as p describes it.
Epistemology - Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy plato.stanford.edu 5 facts
claimDependence coherentism asserts that whenever a subject is justified in believing a proposition p1, the justification for believing p1 depends on the justification the subject has for believing some further propositions p1, p2, … pn.
claimDependence coherentism rests on the supposition that it is possible for a subject to have justification for a proposition without actually believing that proposition.
claimA subject's justification for believing a proposition (p) is defined as possessing a link between the belief that p and the truth of p.
claimHaving justification for believing a proposition does not entail that a subject actually believes that proposition.
formulaA subject S is justified a priori in believing a proposition p if and only if the justification for believing p does not depend on any experience.
Epistemology | Internet Encyclopedia of Philosophy iep.utm.edu 2 facts
claimCausal accounts of knowledge maintain that for someone to know a proposition, there must be a causal connection between the person's belief in that proposition and the fact that the proposition encapsulates.
claimA 'defeater' is a false proposition that, if realized by the believer, would undercut or defeat the justification for their belief.
Naturalized Epistemology - Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy plato.stanford.edu 1 fact
claimWidely shared views in epistemology imply that for a person to know a proposition to be true, the person must have a well-justified belief in the proposition, and the proposition must in fact be true.
Understanding epistemology and its key approaches in research cefcambodia.com 1 fact
claimLemos (2007) states that when considering a proposition, a person can hold one of three mental attitudes: believing and accepting it as true, disbelieving it as false, or withholding belief for further judgment.