A Study of Epistemology
In the sixth century B.C., Homer alludes to a separation of knowledge between the mortals and the gods. He speaks of both gods and human beings as “knowing things”- creatures of knowledge. However, there is a “great difference in the quality and the scope of the knowledge available to the two groups” (Everson, Pg.12). For the mortal human being the contrast between “divine and human knowledge”, paired with possible deception by the gods, has led him to question the idea of knowledge as it exists independently, reminding him that there are many things he cannot “know for certain” (Everson, Pg. 13).
Epistemology, as it exists today, is a branch of philosophy that studies knowledge in an attempt
…show more content…
1).
The development of empiricism has fashioned a present model that is widely used today: the reflection-correspondence theory. The premise behind this ideology states knowledge results from a “mapping” of external objects that are related to the brain through sensory organs” (Heylighen, Pg. 2). Reflection-correspondence understands man will never reach an absolute state of knowledge, but somehow this inability to distinguish reality from illusion, illustrates thought as a “limit of ever more precise reflections of reality” (Heylighen, Pg. 2). Therefore thought, as a physical product of nature, is in itself a limiting trait.
Another significant theory developed in this period is known as the Kantian synthesis of rationalism and empiricism. Kant pictured knowledge as emerging from the human “organization of perceptual data on the basis of inborn cognitive structures” known as “categories” (Heylighen, Pg. 2). His belief parallels, to some extent, that of evolutionary epistemology, which assumes knowledge is constructed by the subject, or social group as a means of adapting to their environment.
This construction happens through “blind-variation”, or what is understood as the correlation of different already existing pieces of knowledge. These “pieces”, or “categories” (according to Kant), are “selectively” retained in combinations that
With this lesson, we begin a new unit on epistemology, which is the philosophical study of knowledge claims. In this first lesson on epistemology, we begin by examining the question “What do we mean when we say we know something?” What exactly is knowledge? We will begin with a presentation that introduces the traditional definition of knowledge. Wood then discusses some of the basic issues raised in the study of epistemology and then presents an approach to epistemology that focuses on obtaining the intellectual virtues, a point we will elaborate on in the next lesson.
Kant credited both empiricism and rationalism movements. He believes that they both contributed to human’s knowledge and should not reject neither one of them. So, he keeps some parts of those principles and defines empiricism a posteriori knowledge and rationalism as a priori knowledge. His goal is to explain and then justify the possibility of scientific knowledge.
Empirical knowing is based on the belief that what someone knows is objective and attainable through our senses (Chinn & Maeona, 2011). Empirical knowledge is created through research to test hypotheses. This type of knowledge could be called evidence based practice. Empirical knowing is used daily in this
Epistemology or theory of knowledge is a branch of philosophy related to the scope and nature of knowledge. The subject focuses on examining the nature of knowledge, and how it relates to beliefs, justification, and truth. Epistemology contract with the means of production of knowledge, as well as skepticism about different knowledge claims. “Epistemology is the philosophical investigation into this question: What can we know? The question, at first, seems pretty simple: It seems pretty obvious that I know that 3+5+8, that the sun will rise tomorrow and that my chances of winning the lottery aren’t very good. I also know
Knowledge. Each person and each culture has a different view and treatment of knowledge. Some view knowledge or the gaining of knowledge as the most important thing. Others view knowledge as important, but imagination or creativity is more important. There are significant similarities and differences between the treatment of knowledge in Genesis and in Hesiod’s Theogony. The treatment of knowledge in each literary work shows the authors intentions, inherent values and preoccupations.
Empiricist philosophers such as John Locke believe that knowledge must come from experience. Others philosophers such as Descartes believe that knowledge is innate; this way of thinking is used by rationalist. In this paper I will discuss the difference between Descartes rationalism in his essays "The Meditations" and Locke's empiricism in his essays "An Essay Concerning Human Understanding". I will then lend my understanding as to what I believe as the ultimate source of knowledge.
Immanuel Kant was a philosopher who took ideas from the empiricists and rationalists to create is own view of how humans come to knowledge. Essentially updating and blending science and logic based knowledge. Kant was a rationalist, yet had empirical views much like John Locke and David Hume. Kant agreed with Hume and Locke on experience. Yet, Kant developed a priori idea of how humans learn to learn that was very different from Locke and Hume.
A perpetual conflict emanating throughout all mankind questions the significance of knowledge to human nature, regarding knowledge’s definition, acquisition, branches, and value. Major role models in the foundation of philosophy - specifically, in this essay, Plato and Aristotle - obsess over the significance of knowledge and its importance to and relationship with the development of human beings and their mindsets. Although Plato’s view on knowledge describes the internal predisposed essence of all Forms and the need for a superior being to extract them from the student, Aristotle’s outlook resides as more reliable and realistic due to his beliefs in the premise of knowledge in the sensation and perception, with continuing development in memory, experience, art and science, and, ultimately, true wisdom.
The same function that gives unity to the different representations in a judgment also gives unity to the mere synthesis of different representations in an intuition, which, expressed generally, is called the pure concept of understanding. The same understanding, therefore, and indeed by means of the very same actions through which it brings the logical form of a judgment into concepts by means of the analytical unity, also brings a transcendental content into its representations by means of the synthetic unity of the
Empiricism- knowledge is obtained through experience only. Theorist argue that we are born a blank slate and via our five senses we gain information and assessment and expanding our knowledge base.
Empiricism is based from sensory experience and observed facts. This view emphasizes that “scientific knowledge can be derived only from sensory experience” (Alligood, 2014, p. 15). Examples of sensory experience are seeing, feeling and hearing facts. This approach is labeled the research-then-theory strategy. An example that Alligood provides is that “formulating a differential diagnosis requires collecting the facts and then devising a list of possible theories to explain the facts” (2014, p. 16). Empiricists believe that reason alone does not give knowledge (Markie, 2017).
For Immanuel Kant, truth is accessible to the mind only because it derives from rational categories already in the mind. Although knowledge begins in the senses, Kant claims, “besides what is given to the sensuous intuition, special concepts must yet be superadded—concepts which have their origin wholly a priori in the pure understanding, and under which every perception must be first of all subsumed and then by their means changed into experience.”6 The sources of such synthetic a priori concepts are categories inherent in reason, and Kant supplies a table of such categories, including in it: Unity (measure), Plurality (magnitude), Totality (whole), Reality, Negation, Limitation, Substance, Cause, Community, Possibility, Existence, and Necessity.7 Thus, the understanding of any perceived thing as a whole entity, or as having an independent material existence, or as being caused by anything, or as itself the cause of anything has its origin in rational categories in the mind and is not traceable to any essential quality or state of being that can be attributed to the thing in itself, according to Kant.
Epistemology is purposed with discovering and studying what knowledge is and how we can classify what we know, how we know it, and provide some type of framework for how we arrived at this conclusion. In the journey to identify what knowledge is the certainty principle was one of the first concepts that I learned that explained how we, as humans, consider ourselves to know something. The certainty concept suggests that knowledge requires evidence that is sufficient to rule out the possibility of error. This concept is exemplified in cases like The Gettier problem in the instance that we suppose (S) someone to know (P) a particular proposition. As Gettier established the Justified True Belief as a conceptual formula for knowledge, certainty
Empiricism is an approach to philosophical thinking assuming that all human knowledge arises originally from sense-experiences. John Locke, George Berkeley and David Hume are most notably known for the branch of empirical philosophy. Philosopher David Hume discusses what he believes are “bundles of perception.” He argues that we can never experience the objective world and alternatively only observe patterns. According to Hume, there are two methods used to detect these patterns, unit and continuity and causality. Casualty is defined as a relationship between ideas that allows you to infer knowledge beyond your immediate experience. Ultimately, Hume’s argument identifies the flaws and limitations involving casualty. Hence, the limitations surrounding casualty deal with the problem of induction, necessary connection and ultimately how it can lead to circularity and infinite regress.
Epistemology is the study of knowledge. “What can I know” (Class note). Epistemology involves Cognitive sciences (the study of the mind), cultural studies (the study of cultures) and the history of science. Epistemology talks about how our knowledge can be proven true or false. Whenever the word Epistemology comes up we think about Knowledge. Everyone uses the word Knowledge all the time because they think that they have a thorough understanding of the concept but when they try to analyze or define knowledge, it becomes difficult for them because one thing leads to the other. Dictionary defined Knowledge as facts, information, and skills acquired by a person through experience and education. Philosophers divide knowledge into three different types, Personal knowledge, Procedural knowledge and propositional knowledge (theoryofknowledge.info). Personal knowledge is based on our experience that is what we saw or heard, Procedural knowledge is based on what we learn from a task, it can be school task, or work task and Propositional knowledge can be from the knowledge of nature. In this paper I will argue that we cannot establish an indubitable foundation for all knowledge because human beings are finite being, that is they are not perfect. Things that are not perfect can be doubted and since humans are not perfect, their knowledge is also not perfect so therefore it is possible to