Write a paper of about 2 pages single spaced on epistemology.

2/2/171Introduction to PhilosophyEpistemology 1Epistemology•Epistemology studies us being right and wrong about realityØA little bit too general: -suppose I were to think, just like that, ‘It is raining now’.-this might be true-but it would be a coincidenceØThat is: we do not care about being right or wrong about reality coincidentallyØWe want to be right, and do not want to be wrong, in response to reality•So: epistemology studies us being right and wrong about reality in a non-coincidental way, that is, in response to reality.Experience, Reality and Knowledge –A Picture•Call ‘experience’ all our thoughts, ideas and perceptions –our ‘inner world’ of beliefs•Call ‘reality’ everything that is ‘out there’, not being part of the inner world•According to this picture, being right about reality is a matter of our experience and beliefs corresponding to reality –being true, being wrong about reality a matter of experience not corresponding to reality•And there must be a responsive linkbetween reality and our beliefs: our beliefs are formed in response to reality.In Between•The words ‘knowledge’ and ‘knowing’ are used is several ways:1.I know this place, this thing, this person > at least being able to recognize on the basis of previous acquaintance > object knowledge2.I know howto cycle, how to write a paper > being able to engage successfully in a certain activity > knowing how3.I know that it will rain tomorrow, that that chair is gray, that Bloomington is in Indiana, that gravity explains why objects fall > propositional knowledge4.I know my physics > knowing many facts in a field and knowing the explanatory connections between them > cf. I understand physics > expert knowledge•Here we will be concerned with 3., though in the history of philosophy 4. was actually the most important one!•We all have 1-3, but few have 4. 2/2/172Possible Links for Knowledge•There is knowledge if and only if:-there are beliefs-which are true-the beliefs are linked to reality in the right way.•Possible candidates for this link:a.Tr u e b e l i e fs a re k n o w l e d g e i f t h e y a re fo r m e d according to the set of relevant rules–they are justified -Justificationismb.Some true beliefs are guaranteed to be true, and other true beliefs are knowledge if they are guaranteed through them –Foundationalismc.Tr u e b e l i e fs a re k n o w l e d g e i f t h e y h av e c o m e a b o u t i n a reliable way -ReliabilismThe Core Idea of Justificationism•Beliefs are formed in accordance with correct rules –the two relevant kinds of rules:-arguments/inferences: from certain beliefs other beliefs are inferred (deduction, induction) –and these arguments must obey certain rules of validity and strength/cogency-non-argumentative rules: certain beliefs are formed in a direct way, for example from perception or inner feeling > still rules apply, like: do not believe hallucinations.•A belief is not knowledge either if is not true, even though it is formed according to the rules, or if it is true, but not formed according to the rules.The Problem with Justificationism•It is possible to construct scenarios in which:-There are true beliefs-These true beliefs are arrived at following impeccable rules-Still we think the link between truth and the justification is coincidental > but then not knowledge•Thus we have counterexamplesto justificationismGettierProblems•Someone is going to be promoted, but it has not been told yet who. The boss, who has never been mistaken, tells x that y will be promoted. X also knows (by checking) that y has a further feature F(say that y has 10 coins in his pocket). Thus x infers deductively that the very person who will be promoted is F–x is justifiedin believing that.•Now as it happens x is the person who gets promotion (thus the boss was mistaken, for once), and it also happens that x is F. Thus it is still true that x’s justified belief is true.•Why is this a counterexample against justificationism?