Epistemology
One set of questions with which Philosophy is centrally concerned
revolves around the nature of knowledge and its source. The theory
of knowledge also goes by the name of ‘epistemology’. It is the
branch of philosophy concerned with the nature, source, limits and
extent of knowledge. The word is from the Greek, episteme, meaning
knowledge and logos, meaning theory.
We ordinarily take ourselves to know many things or at least to be
able to acquire knowledge. How though should we understand
knowledge and of what it means to say that that we have knowledge?
We should note from the outset that these are not just idle questions
posed for the love of speculation. Our very
understanding of the world, ourselves, and the
relationship between ourselves as subjects of
knowledge and experience and the world, may
ultimately depend on the answers we have to
questions concerning the nature and sources of
knowledge. On the face of things when one knows
that such and such is the case one is in a special kind of position. To
know something is to be getting things right in the sense that you’ve
grasped the fact or truth in question. Furthermore, knowledge
appears to be valuable. It is the goal of enquiry. I do not just want to
possess beliefs, but seek knowledge. Our understanding of the world
is dependent on knowledge as are our judgements of what we ought
to do.
The Varieties of Knowledge
 Knowing how I know how to drive. I know how to fix the car.
 Acquaintance I know Bob. I know Paris
 Knowing that I know that Bob went to the pub.
The ordinary notion of knowledge includes the possession of a skill,
being acquainted with something and having knowledge of facts. The
relationship between these kinds of knowledge is an interesting topic.
However, it is knowledge of facts or propositional knowledge that has
been the central concern of epistemology. The term propositional
knowledge simply refers to the fact that our knowledge claims are
claims about propositions. A proposition is what is asserted by a
sentence which says that something is the case – for example, that
Leeds Utd has had a great start to the season, that bachelors are
1
unmarried men, that the Earth is flat. Sometimes what we claim is
true and sometimes it is false. Proposition are expressed in
sentences that are capable of truth or falsity. The clause following
‘that’ in the sentence ‘I know that ….’ is what one claims to know. In
that clause we are stating what we take to be the fact of the matter.
Now we can see straight away that knowledge
involves beliefs. In saying ‘I know that Bob went to
the pub’ I am stating that I possess a particular
belief. That is, I believe that Bob went to the pub. At
this point we confront a key question: which beliefs
of mine are to be counted as knowledge? There
certainly seems to be a difference between (merely)
believing that something is the case and knowing that something is
the case.
Let us say that there has never been a visit to our
planet by an intelligent extra-terrestrial life form. Anne
may be convinced that she has been the victim of an
alien abduction. In fact she was kidnapped by a team
of X-Files enthusiasts who carried out a series of
experiments on her. Now, while Anne has a sincere
belief that aliens have visited, this belief turns out to be
a false one. While we understand why she possesses the belief, we
ought not to say that she knows that aliens have been among us. For
how could she know? It is false to say that aliens have visited. If
knowledge involves reporting how things are, then it cannot be the
case that a false belief counts as knowledge.
The definition of knowledge
Central to the practice of philosophy is the analysis of the everyday,
ordinary concepts we employ. If we want to understand the nature of
knowledge, then perhaps we should start by attempting to provide a
definition of the term. We can begin to define knowledge by
identifying the conditions which have to be satisfied in order for it to
be the case that any person, S, knows that some proposition, p is the
case.
We’ve seen that to know something involves a subjective element –
the belief that you have. It also involves an objective element – the
truth of what you believe. For, the basic job of a belief is to represent
how things are. A first attempt to define knowledge will incorporate
these features.
2
S knows that p if and only if:
1. S believes that p.
2. p is true
Is it sufficient to have a true belief in order to possess knowledge?
Side question: what does it mean to say that something is a
necessary condition for something else? To say that something
is a sufficient condition?
There seems some an immediate problems with respect to those
true beliefs I might have, but which I possess as result of luck, faulty
reasoning or have derived from false beliefs. Imagine Jim, the
soothsaying hermit. Although Jim has had no contact with the
outside world for thirty years, living on a rock on a small island off the
coast of Essex, Jim has formed the belief that a man named Gordon
Brown is the prime minister. He has come to have this belief
because of the way in which the sacred rat bones scattered during
one of his ceremonies. There is no doubt that Jim has a true belief,
but its formation is entirely a fluke, a product of luck. This seems to
be too flimsy and chancy a basis for a belief to count as knowledge.
Indeed, would we even want to say that it amounts to an opinion in
the sense in which we ordinarily deploy the notion?
True beliefs can be based on false beliefs, and that
seems to tell against their counting as knowledge.
Suppose that I believe truly that the last name of
the President of the United States in 1996 begins
with a ‘C’. Since Bill Clinton was President then this
belief is indeed true. However, suppose this belief is based upon the
false belief that the President was Winston Churchill. My true belief
that the President’s name begins with a ‘C’ does not seem to be
knowledge because it depends on a false belief.
One way of characterising the difference between belief and
knowledge is in terms of the kind of reasons one has for holding the
belief. Alternatively, one may look less at the reasons for holding a
particular belief and more at what has caused or brought it about that
I do possess it. For the moment, though, the point is that when one
knows that something is the case rather than merely believe that it
is, then one’s belief looks as if it possesses certain properties in
3
virtue of which it is elevated to the status of knowledge. So, the Key
question becomes: what must be added to true belief to convert it
into knowledge?
The earliest and most influential answer to the question of how we
should identify that something more is due to Plato and set out in the
Meno. To distinguish mere opinion or belief from knowledge Plato
suggests that we define knowledge as ‘true belief with a logos (an
account)’. This notion of an account has been understood and
developed in terms of the justification for holding the belief. We are
concerned with knowledge because we want and value true beliefs.
The pursuit of knowledge is the search for the kind of justifications
which underwrite the beliefs we possess.
The definition of knowledge with which we shall begin has been
called the tri-partite definition or account of knowledge because it
decomposes what we mean by knowledge into three elements.
S knows that p if and only if:
1. S believes that p.
2. p is true.
3. S’s belief that p is justified.
Exercise: ‘Knowledge is more than mere belief’. Defend this
claim using your own words and your own example(s).
Key points – Why do we think knowledge has special authority
or status? Why does there seem to be a difference between
merely having a true belief and having knowledge? What is the
importance of providing reasons or justification for your belief?
An important issue now arises. Where are we to find the justification
for our beliefs? What is the source of our knowledge? Some
philosophers have claimed that the source of our knowledge of the
fundamental truths about reality is to be located in reason. This is
Rationalism. Others disagree, holding that knowledge is ultimately
grounded in experience. This is Empiricism. We shall examine these
positions over the course of the next term.
4