Interpretation of Knowledge as Fact: Deductive Inference
Andrew S. Drazdik Jr
20th, September 2013
Please respect Copyright © as “created” by “international agreement” (Title 17 United States Code) and
printed in the United States by Constitutional rule of law, Copyright Act 1976
Interpretation of Knowledge as Fact: Deductive Inference





Reason
Intuition
Senses
  Fact
K

Exactness
K

Precision
k
Belief
Truth


Evidence
Expert Advice
Interpretation by experts, as law officers, judges, administrative law judges, and scholars. When analysis
of evidence may be interpretive, or questioned, by those experts then the interpretation must not be
arbitrary. Evidence as knowledge from fact by experts then must be judged in accordance as knowledge
by analysis, and rules of analysis.
The study, as scholarly science, of how the interpretation of all reality to the state of knowledge
is known as Epistemology. The science of knowledge; in its broadest signification if refers simply to an
investigation of knowledge and its problems.1Or, epistemology, the study of the origin, nature, and
limits of human knowledge.2 The phenomena of reality which is perceived by the intellect and senses
materializes to the personal level and may be recorded to the social level by means which must be
judged or interpreted. How true is the phenomena perceived, and how relevant then defines the
parameters of its factual nature.
Truth is then the humanly rationalized phenomena, and by the means which it is perceived and
conveyed. The accepted definition of truth being the quality of those propositions (logically) that
accord with reality, specifying what is in fact the case. 3 The quality of how the rationalized state of
reality which is perceived is that of question with epistemological science when the subjective and
objective qualities of such are judged as knowledge. Belief by the subjective which the “logical truth”…if
descriptive, is factual truth, giving us knowledge of the observed phenomena or of reality. If
prescriptive, it is a normative truth about goods to be sought or actions to be done.4
1
“Epistemology”.New Catholic Encyclopedia. Vol. 5 1967 pgs 492-495
“Epistemology”.The New Encylopedia Britannica. Vol. 4 2005 pg 528
3
“Truth”. The Cambridge Dictionary of Philosophy. 1995 pgs 812-813
2
4
Adler, J. Mortimer. Truth in Religion, The Plurality of and Unity of Truth. NY: Macmillian Pub. Co. 1990 pgs 11-12
Andrew S. DrazdikJr,
National Writers Union, UAW Local 1981/AFL-CIO, ID: 92743
Page 2
Interpretation of Knowledge as Fact: Deductive Inference



Reason
Intuition
Senses
Subjective


Belief
Truth


Evidence
Expert Advice
Objective
The subjective and objective perspective which in terms of morality, differ greatly from those of
epistemology as a science to qualify such logical notions as knowledge. The differences in regards as
also a bias to reality if considered to the normative value as perceived by the majority, that in terms of
society the normative quality is then ethical as to what are those values perceivable. Thus, a reason for
belief. The word “belief” is commonly used to designate both a particular sort of psychological state, a
state of believing, and a particular intentional content or proposition believed.5 6
The rational justification of which are then known as a general principle or standard, which as
normative quality brings forth a sense of knowledge. Which as a sense of knowledge is then known as
prescriptive or normative to the majority in an ethical perspective. The issue of a common knowledge
that questions epistemological science in these regards are then the logical propositions which bring
forth the sense as the rational justification7, or reason for action. 8
The process and methods of such rational justification when knowledge is judged and made into
a justification involves analysis. Analysis, the process of breaking up a concept, proposition, linguistic
complex, or fact into its simple or ultimate constituents.9 The logical propositions of any belief are an
5
Belief, Reasons for Belief. The Cambridge Dictionary of Philosophy. 1995 pg 678
See Also. Edmund L. Gettier. “Is Justified True Belief Knowledge?”Analysis XXV (1963) from Chisholm M. Roderick. Theory of
Knowledge. Prentice-Hall, Inc. 1966
7 Richard B. Brandt. “Epistemology and Ethics, Parallel Between.”The Encycylopedia of Philosophy. Vol. 3 1967 pg 5-8
8
Reasons for Action, The Cambridge Dictionary of Philosophy. 1995 pgs 677-678
9
Analysis, The Cambridge Dictionary of Philosophy. 1995 pg 22
6
Andrew S. DrazdikJr,
National Writers Union, UAW Local 1981/AFL-CIO, ID: 92743
Page 3
Interpretation of Knowledge as Fact: Deductive Inference
understanding (German: Verstehen) of truth10, which by the notion of methods and reason that are
independent of experience or a priori.11 The judgment from the subjective point of view that such
analysis may bring forth any truth to be presumed as knowledge has been and is questioned as the
nature of such knowledge. Mortimer J. Adler has termed such judgments have a sense of truth or
falsity in themselves as correctness, which relative under those methods and reason by logical notion be
suspended judgment, and or asserted as absolute. 12 In terms of German philosophy and psychology
the notion of Verstehen:
The “intuitionist”. Perception memory, and self –awareness, he will tell us do not suffice to
justify what it is that we claim to know about the states of mind of other people, for no
deductive or inductive argument based upon the data of perception, memory and selfawareness will warrant any claim to such knowledge; hence, there must be another sourcepossibly the Verstehen, or “intuitive understanding,” of German philosophy and psychology.
As a reason for action, the product as knowledge, for objective reasons by normative ethics
then accept as objective in the rational sense of such justification. The propositions to then determine
such rational means of justification to provide the analysis with evidence, that a priori, as “adequate
evidence”13 allows for a correctness in truth. When propositions are deduced they are “known by
deduction”14, within such terms that are prescriptive, or normative, as also descriptive the issues of
evidence provided to the intellect are in essence as those that can be ethically known as normative
ethics in society.
10
See. Wilhem Dilthey’s Einleitung in die Geisteswissenschaften (Leipzig: Tuebner, 1883), and Alfred Schuete,
“Scheler’s Theory of Inter-subjectivity,” Philosophy and Phenomenological Research, II (1942), 323-41. From
Chisholm M. Roderick. Theory of Knowledge. Prentice-Hall, Inc. 1966
11
“A priori” The Cambridge Dictionary of Philosophy. 1995 pgs 29-30
12
Ibid. Adler, J. M. Truth in Religion, The Plurality of and Unity of Truth. pg 12
13
See Also. Herbert Heidelberger, “Knowledge, Certainty, and Probability,” Inquiry VI (1963) pgs 242-50
See. The Philosophical Works of Descartes, ed. E.S Haldane and G.R.I. Ross. I (London: Cambridge Univ. Press,
1934) Chisholm M. Roderick. Theory of Knowledge. Prentice-Hall, Inc. 1966
14
Andrew S. DrazdikJr,
National Writers Union, UAW Local 1981/AFL-CIO, ID: 92743
Page 4
Interpretation of Knowledge as Fact: Deductive Inference
Works Cited:
Adler, J. Mortimer. Truth in Religion, The Plurality of and Unity of Truth. NY: Macmillian Pub. Co. 1990
“Analysis”, The Cambridge Dictionary of Philosophy. 1995 pg 22
“A priori” The Cambridge Dictionary of Philosophy. 1995 pgs 29-30
“Belief, Reasons for Belief”. The Cambridge Dictionary of Philosophy. 1995 pg 678
Brandt. Richard B. “Epistemology and Ethics, Parallel Between. ” The Encycylopedia of Philosophy. Vol. 3
1967 pgs 5-8
Chisholm M. Roderick. Theory of Knowledge. Prentice-Hall, Inc. 1966
Descartes. The Philosophical Works of Descartes, ed. E.S Haldane and G.R.I. Ross. I (London: Cambridge
Univ. Press, 1934)
Edmund L. Gettier. “Is Justified True Belief Knowledge?”Analysis XXV (1963)
“Epistemology”. The New Encylopedia Britannica. Vol. 4 2005 pg 528
“Epistemology”.New Catholic Encyclopedia. Vol. 5 1967 pgs 492-495
Heidelberger Herbert, “Knowledge, Certainty, and Probability,” Inquiry VI (1963) pgs 242-50
“Reason for Action”, The Cambridge Dictionary of Philosophy. 1995 pgs 677-678
“Truth”. The Cambridge Dictionary of Philosophy. 1995 pgs 812-813
Wilhem Dilthey’s Einleitung in die Geisteswissenschaften (Leipzig: Tuebner, 1883), and Alfred Schuete,
“Scheler’s Theory of Inter-subjectivity,” Philosophy and Phenomenological Research, II (1942), 323-41.
Andrew S. DrazdikJr,
National Writers Union, UAW Local 1981/AFL-CIO, ID: 92743
Page 5