> *From:* Marc Carter [[email protected]] > *Sent:* Thursday, October 21, 2010 9:22 AM > *To:* Teaching in the Psychological Sciences (TIPS) > *Subject:* RE: [tips] Why don't we hear more about such things? > > > That's certainly how I learned it. "Knowledge" is justified, true > belief. One can have true beliefs, but without justification they do > not rise to the level of knowledge. One cannot "know" something that > is false.
Well, that is certainly the traditional definition of knowledge, but everyone (who studies epistemology) also knows (yes, knows) that it is an inadequate definition. Consider the legion of Edmund Gettier-style counterexamples. Ex: I look out a window to my backyard. I see (what appears to be) an orange. In fact, unbeknownst to me, it is made of plastic, and it is only half an orange. Behind it, unseen by me, is an actual orange. So we come to the question, do I "know" that there is an orange in the backyard? Most people would say "no" because I am decieved about so many aspects of the situation. Nevertheless, I have a belief (that there is an orange in the backyard) which is justified (by my observation) and which is true (there is indeed an orange in my backyard... I just can't see it). For the original Gettier paper (Analysis, 1963) see: http://www.ditext.com/gettier/gettier.html It is cited in virtually every epistemology text. Chris -- Christopher D. Green Department of Psychology York University Toronto, ON M3J 1P3 Canada 416-736-2100 ex. 66164 [email protected] http://www.yorku.ca/christo/ ========================== --- You are currently subscribed to tips as: [email protected]. To unsubscribe click here: http://fsulist.frostburg.edu/u?id=13090.68da6e6e5325aa33287ff385b70df5d5&n=T&l=tips&o=5871 or send a blank email to leave-5871-13090.68da6e6e5325aa33287ff385b70df...@fsulist.frostburg.edu
