Exam (elaborations)
Epistemology questions and answers
- Module
- Epistemology
- Institution
- AQA
A compilation of questions and answers for all short Epistemology potential exam questions - from the AQA Philosophy specification
[Show more]
Seller
Follow
Content preview
Epistemology exam practiceWHAT IS KNOWLEDGE?
1. Define acquaintance knowledge, ability knowledge and propositional knowledge. (3)
Acquaintance knowledge is the knowledge of something or someone, ability knowledge is the
knowledge of being able to do something and propositional knowledge is knowing facts.
2. Explain how propositional knowledge may be analysed according to Zagzebski. Outline
Zagzebski's view that knowledge requires a specific kind of definition. (5)
Zagzebski’s definition of propositional knowledge is ‘belief arising out of acts of intellectual
virtue’. You know that p if and only if:
1. You believe that p
2. Your belief that p arises from an act (or acts) of intellectual virtue.
The morally best action will be one that aims to help, succeeds, and succeeds as a result of
acting in the way a virtuous person would act. Call this an ‘act of virtue’. People with the relevant
virtue, e.g. kindness, will be disposed to help and will reliably succeed, so they will reliably
perform acts of kindness. However, Zagzebski notes that someone could perform such an
action without having the virtue of kindness (the disposition to help reliably on many occasions)
as long as they act in the way a virtuous person would act on this occasion.
We can now say that knowledge is belief arising out of acts of intellectual virtue. We don’t need
to mention that it is true belief, because we have defined ‘an act of intellectual virtue’ as
entailing that the belief formed is true. Virtues dispose us to succeed reliably, acts of virtue are
ones in which we do succeed, and we succeed because we do what a person with the relevant
virtues would do. That is why Zagzebski’s analysis of knowledge has just two conditions: that p
is true is entailed by the second condition, that the belief that p arises out of acts of intellectual
virtue.
3. Explain the tripartite definition of knowledge (5)
Plato’s tripartite definition of knowledge states that the three conditions of justified true belief
are equivalent to knowledge and are necessary and suNicient, meaning that each criteria is
essential for knowledge, so in any case if we lack a condition, there cannot be knowledge, and
suNicient meaning that all three equate to knowledge and nothing more is needed. Plato states
that if my beliefs are true, then they are just as useful to me as knowledge. The condition of
belief is necessary because it makes no sense to say that you know something without believing
it. Truth is necessary because a knowledge claim must correspond to reality, and you cannot
know something if it is false. If the belief is backed up by reason or evidence, the belief becomes
more dependable, therefore justification is necessary as without proof a belief could be true by
coincidence.
4. What is the diKerence between necessary and suKicient conditions (3)
Necessary conditions are absolutely required and must be true, they are needed to have the
thing in question. SuNicient conditions are conditions that can infer that a proposition is true, A
is a suNicient condition for B when if you have A you must have B too, having A is enough or
suNicient to guarantee you have B. Suppose that if Nellie is an elephant, then she has a trunk.
Being an elephant is a suNicient condition of her having a trunk; having a trunk in turn is a
necessary condition of Nellie’s being an elephant.
5. Explain why truth is not necessary for knowledge (5)
, The problem with truth being a necessary condition for knowledge is because there have been
many times in the past where people thought they had knowledge of something, but it turned
out to be false so is no longer counted as knowledge today. Scientific knowledge is based on the
available evidence at the time, for example in the past, the geocentric model was considered
correct and as knowledge, but due to more evidence now, we know that this is not the case. As
knowledge could be false, then it arguably is not knowledge as it seems self-contradictory to
say that something we know something is true but could be false, therefore truth is not
necessary for knowledge.
Response: Paradigm shift – the concept of truth was bound by their time, not the time now.
6. Explain why belief is not necessary for knowledge (5)
The tripartite definition states belief is necessary for knowledge, meaning that belief is a
condition that must exist for a proposition to be knowledge, however it is plausible to know a
proposition without believing it. Belief is not a necessary condition for knowledge as you can
sometimes believe that you don’t know something, but you do. Colin Radford uses the example
of a student who learns an answer to a question but forgets it. In an exam, the question comes
up and the student remembers the answer but does not believe it is correct, arguably this is
knowledge without belief. Knowledge and belief are diNerent mental states. As knowledge is
infallible, but beliefs can be fallible, so knowledge must involve going beyond belief.
7. Explain why justification is not necessary for knowledge (5)
Justification is not necessary for knowledge because it is hard to measure what counts as
adequate knowledge and how much evidence is needed. We can also see that justification is
not necessary when it comes to our immediate perceptual awareness. For example if I am
looking at a red object, to claim that the red object exists would require some justification, but
to know that I am having the experience of redness does not require justification as it is known
without any reasoning or inference. If knowledge comes from a reliable source, then
justification is not necessary.
8. Explain why the three conditions of the tripartite definition of knowledge are not
suKicient (5)
The tripartite definition of knowledge states that having a justified true belief is the necessary
and suNicient conditions of knowledge. However, there is a problem with these conditions, they
are not suNicient as some beliefs are inferred from false beliefs, and justified true belief is open
to infinite regress. Gettier cases show that we can have all three conditions in the tripartite
definition of knowledge without it being knowledge because of epistemic luck. One case that
Gettier uses is with Smith and Jones. Smith and Jones are both at a job interview, Smith gains
justified belief that Jones will get the job as the president of the company assures him of it.
Smith sees Jones count out 10 coins from his pocket and formulates the proposition that ‘The
person with 10 coins in their pocket will get the job’. However, it turns out that Smith gets the job
and he also happened to have 10 coins in his pocket. The proposition that Smith formulated
was true, he believed it and has justification for it, but he only arrived at the justified true belief
by the epistemic luck that he had 10 coins in his pocket. Gettier cases show that it is possible to
have justified true belief, but we cannot say it is knowledge and therefore the joint suNiciency of
the tripartite definition is undetermined.
9. Outline the tripartite definition of knowledge and explain why cases of lucky true beliefs
pose challenge to the definition. (12)
Plato’s tripartite definition of knowledge states that the three conditions of justified true belief
are equivalent to knowledge and are necessary and suNicient, meaning that each criteria is
, essential for knowledge, so in any case if we lack a condition, there cannot be knowledge, and
suNicient meaning that all three equate to knowledge and nothing more is needed. Plato states
that if my beliefs are true, then they are just as useful to me as knowledge. The condition of
belief is necessary because it makes no sense to say that you know something without believing
it. Truth is necessary because a knowledge claim must correspond to reality, and you cannot
know something if it is false. If the belief is backed up by reason or evidence, the belief becomes
more dependable, therefore justification is necessary as without proof a belief could be true by
coincidence.
The cases of lucky true beliefs pose challenge to the definition because it questions the joint
suNiciency and necessity of the tripartite definition. Epistemic luck or lucky true beliefs are
shown with Gettier cases. One case that Gettier uses is with Smith and Jones. Smith and Jones
are both at a job interview, Smith gains justified belief that Jones will get the job as the president
of the company assures him of it. Smith sees Jones count out 10 coins from his pocket and
formulates the proposition that ‘The person with 10 coins in their pocket will get the job’.
However, it turns out that Smith gets the job and he also happened to have 10 coins in his
pocket. The proposition that Smith formulated was true, he believed it and has justification (to
some extent) for it, but he only arrived at the justified true belief by the epistemic luck that he
had 10 coins in his pocket. Gettier cases show that it is possible to have justified true belief, but
we cannot say it is knowledge as it was based on luck, and therefore poses a challenge to the
tripartite definition.
10. Outline infallibilism (5)
Infallibilism argues that for a belief to count as knowledge, it must be true and justified in a way
to make it infallible or certain. Infallibilism strengthens the weakest condition of knowledge,
which is justification. It argues that for a claim to be knowledge, the justification must be strong
enough to the point that certainty is achieved. We should only count as knowledge the things
that we cannot rationally doubt e.g. 2+2=4.
The premises for infallibilism say that you can only know P if and only if:
- P is true
- I believe P
- My justification for P guarantees that P is true, and it cannot be rationally doubted
Gettier cases are reliant on epistemic luck, to remove this claim that knowledge can only be
allowed if the justification is strong enough for it to be impossible to be wrong. For example with
the coin example, Smith would have to check his pockets to rule out any doubt.
11. Outline the no false lemma definition of knowledge (5)
A lemma is a premise accepted as true in an argument, so a false lemma is a false belief. The
addition of no false lemma creates a fourth condition to the tripartite definition of knowledge.
This view of knowledge states that you can only know P if and only if:
- P is true
- I believe P
- I have justification for P
- I have not inferred P from any false lemmas
This can solve Gettier cases because with the coin example, Smith’s belief that the person who
will get the job has 10 coins in his pocket was inferred from his belief that Jones will get the job
as he was told so which was a false lemma so cannot be considered examples of knowledge.
The no false lemmas view allows us to make sure that there are no false lemmas or invalid
reasoning involved in coming to know a proposition so that the justification is not based on a
false belief
12. Outline reliabilism (5)
, Reliabilism uses the tripartite definition of knowledge but replaces the weakest condition of
justification with a belief required by a reliable cognitive process. This view of knowledge states
that you can only know P if and if:
- P is true
- I believe P
- I have acquired my belief by a reliable cognitive process
Reliable cognitive processes produce more truth and for animals the processes have evolved to
become vision, cognition, memory etc. and mean that animals can interact successfully with
the world and so we can say they have knowledge about it. This can solve Gettier cases because
with the Smith and Jones Gettier case, knowing how many coins are in someone’s pocket as a
way of assessing if they will get a job is not a reliable cognitive process.
13. Outline virtue epistemology (5)
Virtue epistemology argues for a true definition of knowledge and states that knowledge is
cognitive contact with reality produced by intellectual virtues. Virtue epistemology tackles the
issues resulting from the gap between truth and justification leading to the definition of
knowledge that you can know P if and only if:
- P is true
- I believe P
- my belief of P has been arisen from an act of intellectual virtue
Intellectual virtues are characteristics of thought and reason which contribute towards
intellectual flourishing. This includes intuition, memory and perception. Intellectual virtues are
valued as they reliably lead to true belief. The Gettier cases were not a result of any intellectual
virtues, they were just pure coincidence. Virtue epistemology solves Gettier and Goldman
cases, gives a true definition with necessary and suNicient condition and avoids epistemic luck.
14. Explain Gettier’s challenge to the tripartite definition of knowledge and explain how an
account of epistemic virtue can be used to show why Smith lacks knowledge in one of
Gettier’s original counter-examples (12)
Gettier cases show that we can have all three conditions in the tripartite definition of knowledge
without it suNiciently being knowledge because of epistemic luck. One case that Gettier uses is
with Smith and Jones. Smith and Jones are both at a job interview, Smith gains justified belief
that Jones will get the job as the president of the company assures him of it. Smith sees Jones
count out 10 coins from his pocket and formulates the proposition that ‘The person with 10
coins in their pocket will get the job’. However, it turns out that Smith gets the job and he also
happened to have 10 coins in his pocket. The proposition that Smith formulated was true, he
believed it and has justification for it, but he only arrived at this justified true belief by the
epistemic luck that he had 10 coins in his pocket. Gettier cases show that it is possible to have
justified true belief, but we cannot say it is knowledge and therefore the joint suNiciency of the
tripartite definition is undetermined.
However, an account of epistemic virtue can be used to show why Smith lacks knowledge in this
coin case because Virtue epistemology’s definition of knowledge states that you can know P if
and only if: I believe P and my belief of P has been arisen from an act of intellectual virtue.
Intellectual virtues are characteristics of thought and reason which contribute towards
intellectual flourishing. Intellectual virtues are things like intuition, memory and perception and
also include character traits such as conscientiousness and open-mindedness. Acts of
intellectual virtue dispose us to succeed reliably, acts of virtue are ones in which we do
succeed, and we succeed because we do what people with the relevant virtues do. This solves
the Gettier coin case because Smith did not use intellectual virtues to come to the proposition
that the man with 10 coins in his pocket would get the job.
The benefits of buying summaries with Stuvia:
Guaranteed quality through customer reviews
Stuvia customers have reviewed more than 700,000 summaries. This how you know that you are buying the best documents.
Quick and easy check-out
You can quickly pay through credit card for the summaries. There is no membership needed.
Focus on what matters
Your fellow students write the study notes themselves, which is why the documents are always reliable and up-to-date. This ensures you quickly get to the core!
Frequently asked questions
What do I get when I buy this document?
You get a PDF, available immediately after your purchase. The purchased document is accessible anytime, anywhere and indefinitely through your profile.
Satisfaction guarantee: how does it work?
Our satisfaction guarantee ensures that you always find a study document that suits you well. You fill out a form, and our customer service team takes care of the rest.
Who am I buying these notes from?
Stuvia is a marketplace, so you are not buying this document from us, but from seller elliedolphin. Stuvia facilitates payment to the seller.
Will I be stuck with a subscription?
No, you only buy these notes for £4.99. You're not tied to anything after your purchase.
Can Stuvia be trusted?
4.6 stars on Google & Trustpilot (+1000 reviews)
76669 documents were sold in the last 30 days
Founded in 2010, the go-to place to buy revision notes and other study material for 14 years now