Epistemology is the study of knowledge, acquisition thereof, and the justification of belief in a given claim.

learn more… | top users | synonyms

1
vote
1answer
64 views

Is there a logic of married bachelors?

I'm sure this question must have a simple clarification, but I am largely unfamiliar with the branches of formal logic and not sure where to look for it. We know that "All bachelors are unmarried ...
1
vote
1answer
35 views

The Logic Of Sense

Can someone help me understand the 11th and 13th series of Delueze's "The Logic Of Sense" I am struggling to fully understand what he is trying to get across with the ideas of: nonsense the ...
2
votes
1answer
49 views

How does Kant make the transition from proving the existence of synthetic apriori truths to the noumena/phenomena distinction?

I understand how Kant arrives at the existence of synthetic apriori truths, in opposition to Hume's relation of ideas/matters of fact distinction. I also understand the overall epistemic distinction ...
3
votes
3answers
142 views

How does the concept of “the Other” relate to the problem of “other minds?”

I have not really pursued the history or literature on either one of these topics, though the two concepts are often encountered in readings. I have always vaguely taken the "Other" to emerge ...
1
vote
1answer
86 views

Is naturalized epistemology insincere?

The insincerity objection is often raised against skeptical positions (nominalism, anti-realism, anti-intellectualism, solipsism, etc.). An ancient anecdote tells of a skeptic, who taught that actions ...
10
votes
9answers
252 views

What epistemic principle allows us to be certain that highly improbable events will never occur in real life?

Consider the following scenario: I am alone at home and I accidentally spill a bottle of ketchup on my kitchen floor, and the ketchup splatters across the floor in such a way as to form the words ...
6
votes
4answers
106 views

Does 'to believe that P' imply 'to believe that P is true'?

Williams (1973) casually asserts that to believe that P is to believe that P is true. He explains what he means by that: To believe that so and so is one and the same as to believe that ...
2
votes
3answers
53 views

Granted Hume's psychological perspective regarding impressions and ideas, doesn't this make his epistemology obscure?

Hume held that all that was meaningfully present to the mind consisted in matters of fact (impressions) and relations of ideas. But even ideas were faint impressions themselves, formed over time by ...
3
votes
2answers
124 views

Did Kant come to believe that we have access to things-in-themselves after all?

Kant's position on things-in-themselves is often described Socratically, of them we know only one thing, that they are. However, in an old but apparently still popular history of philosophy book I ...
0
votes
1answer
52 views

Which 20th century analytic philosopher wrote about a thought-experiment of a king and a jester?

The following thought-experiment was put forward by a 20th century analytic philosopher. Unfortunately I cannot remember the exact context in which it was proposed. Does anybody know how may have come ...
0
votes
2answers
73 views

How does mind discovers its own existence?

By mind I mean the observer, the self, something that perceive. I hope that you understand because I can't find the right word. So, your mind can observe the external existence, and can observe its ...
0
votes
0answers
48 views

'God exists and does not deceive us': Why is this necessary for memory of proofs?

Source: p 38, Think: A Compelling Introduction to Philosophy (1 ed, 1999) by Simon Blackburn Caution: I modified Blackburn's syntax and organisation to ameliorate readability; I added all numbering. ...
1
vote
0answers
38 views

Can we be sure that humans are the most intelligent species? [closed]

Humans typically perceive ourselves to be the most intelligent species on Earth. But as a counter argument, one could propose that we are very unintelligent, to the extent that, without even ...
3
votes
0answers
67 views

Suffering, the sacred, and the sublime: what should science make of the third kind of knowledge?

Ryle and Wittgenstein carved out knowledge-how (craft) as irreducible to the traditional propositional knowledge, Ryle gave accepting the irreducibility the scary name of anti-intellectualism. SEP ...
8
votes
1answer
103 views

How did Kant define knowledge?

A recent question about the Plato's formula K=JTB (knowledge is justified true belief) made me curious as to what Kant thought on the matter. In the prefaces and the Introduction to the first Critique ...
14
votes
12answers
1k views

What is a straight line?

I am not a philosopher; I am an engineer with a reasonable grasp of mathematics. This question has been bothering me for a long time, and I have asked a variation of it to a mathematical community. ...
2
votes
2answers
59 views

Can strong omnipotence be decomposed into “able to do all logically possible things” and “able to do all logically impossible things”?

A lot of debate in the "omnipotent being" or "omnipotent, omniscient, omnipresent, omnibenevolent, etc." being debate revolves around the definition of the terms. I consider the "strong form" of ...
1
vote
2answers
62 views

How is knowledge most commonly defined today?

Maybe you will say justified true belief, but some claim that it doesn't account for Gettier's, so: is there a better definition which is becoming more prominent today? Or can the JTB, perhaps with ...
1
vote
0answers
34 views

Is it even possible to resolve the truth of different philosophic schools of thought? [duplicate]

A logical argument has propositions or axioms which are assumed to be true. It then has logical statements/manipulations which, if all valid, reach a logically valid conclusion. If the argument is ...
1
vote
1answer
65 views

How can one verify “something that is everything”?

For 'there is a thing that is everything', or 'everything that is something' (equivalent), how are we able to tell such a statement is true? Given such something, all that something would all be the ...
2
votes
6answers
124 views

Why cannot an absence of something cause something positive?

Preface: I know that 'positive' means the acceptation in philosophy of "dealing only with facts". [Source: 80% down the page:] Should we instead just decree that knowledge is justified true ...
5
votes
1answer
55 views

Can the Kantian categories be interpreted naturalistically?

This relates to a previous question as to whether or not we are "born with" Kantian categories. I had objected that this would imply that the categories in some manner depend upon or inhere in a ...
3
votes
1answer
74 views

Truth and factness of reality [closed]

In relation to my earlier question, Apart from Fact being a component of reality, what other factors comprise of reality which are sufficient for anything to be Fact? And by saying Truth: a ...
1
vote
0answers
19 views

How do I choose what I think? [closed]

Where do my thoughts come from? What allows me to choose them at all? Regardless of whether free will is an illusion or not, what makes a thought happen? (This is a mix of a philosophical question and ...
4
votes
1answer
44 views

Are particulars knowable?

In the 13th thesis of the Incoherence, Al-Ghazali refutes the claim of the falsafa (peripatetic) philosophers that particulars aren't knowable by the First. Is this claim made on the basis that ...
14
votes
2answers
693 views

Are there any philosophers that argued for knowledge having intrinsic value?

Many (if not most) philosophers agree that knowledge has value. However, does it have intrinsic value, or is its value purely in its ability to affect things outside of the realm of knowledge? Are ...
0
votes
0answers
42 views

How does Kant's transcendental argument show that the basis for Skepticism is unintelligible?

I understand Kant's categories, however I don't understand their value in arguing against skepticism.
4
votes
1answer
41 views

What is a Criterial Solution in the following quote regarding the Problem of Minds?

I'm having difficulty with the language in this article on the Problem of Other Minds. It provides 3 solutions to the epistemological problem of other minds in section 1.1 - "The Epistemological ...
2
votes
2answers
100 views

Is Objective Reality really just the Subjective Agreement of a given group?

The famous quote "Perception is Reality" can lead to solipsism as a philosophy - that perhaps "I" am the only being that exists, and "reality" is only what I am creating it to be through my own ...
12
votes
3answers
189 views

What are the philosophical consequences of the undecidability of the spectral gap?

An article published in Nature yesterday proves that finding the spectral gap of a material based on a complete quantum level description of the material is undecidable (in the Turing sense). One of ...
1
vote
4answers
126 views

Are our thoughts merely a product of chemical reactions?

What I mean by this question is if our free will is merely an illusion. The same conditions produce the same results, so if an exact copy of me was made in my sleep and replaced my, would it have the ...
14
votes
7answers
5k views

How do animals think if they don't speak a language?

The way we humans think and reason involves us using words to describe things. Even when thinking in our heads, we use words to think. This begs the question, how do animals who don't understand a ...
3
votes
2answers
127 views

How is a person able to think?

People are basically just collections of a lot of atoms, so how is someone able to think? Thinking is how we understand things, but I don't understand how thought is even possible? Is thinking the ...
4
votes
2answers
82 views

How has big data affected theory formation, underdetermination and the realist/construtivist debate? [closed]

How has [or will] the prevalence of “big data” – the exploding plethora of information and computing power to correlate it – impact[ed] (i) the scientific method’s theory/hypothesis formation, (ii) ...
5
votes
5answers
150 views

Has anyone ever argued that religious beliefs are unjustified true beliefs?

Consider the following: It can be argued that some ethical rules are good for humanity, even from a utilitarian or evolutionary point of view. Some of these ethical rules are common to most ...
2
votes
1answer
70 views

Did Aristotle know that Moon revolves around the Earth?

Of course he did. But I can not think of a justification available to Aristotle that wouldn't equally justify that Sun revolves around the Earth. Yet "Aristotle knew that Sun revolves around the ...
2
votes
6answers
929 views

Is any aspect of the supernatural testable? What level of proof is possible for the supernatural?

Assume the supernatural does exist, and consists of beings/forces that can interact with our natural universe in ways that are contrary to the natural laws of this universe (at least as we know them). ...
32
votes
7answers
2k views

Are Methodological Assumptions of StackExchange Fundamentally Flawed?

I looked here for an answer while writing a paper on evidence and scientific inference. I then saw the bold claims made by the website that the process goes as follows: Anybody can ask a question ...
3
votes
2answers
79 views

Do limitations on computability and computational resources have any consequences for epistemology?

Do Turing undecidability and computational complexity considerations (NP-hardness, etc...) have consequences for epistemology? If X function or propostion is undecidable or requires an intractable ...
5
votes
5answers
411 views

Do Goedel's incompleteness theorems have any consequences for epistemology?

Do Goedel's results have any impact on the theory of knowledge: realism vs anti-realism, the existence of the noumenal, the existence of synthetic apriori truths, etc... or are they just relevant to ...
10
votes
6answers
307 views

On the difference between “knowing” and “understanding”?

Intuitively, there is a clear difference between knowing something and understanding something. We speak about some getting or internalizing a concept, having a gut feeling for something, etc... Some ...
2
votes
1answer
76 views

Is anyone considered authoritative on Kant's First Critique?

As I dive deeper into understanding epistemology more broadly and Kant's first Critique more specifically, I have taken up advice from related posts to read his Prolegomena to Any Future Metaphysics ...
10
votes
4answers
425 views

Is geometry mathematical or scientific?

Is Euclidean geometry a mathematical theory? Or is it a scientific theory? If taking it to be a mathematical theory would it be due to having alternative geometries? If so, is it in some way related ...
4
votes
2answers
137 views

What is the point of reductio ad absurdum in metaphysics?

Philosophers often use reductio ad absurdum in metaphysics and philosophy of mind to make a point, to justify their position, or a thought experiment, or to reject a position or theory they do not ...
6
votes
1answer
213 views

Are there some facets of perceptual experience which cannot be characterized as conceptual?

Some philosophers (e.g John McDowell) argue that the content of perceptual experience is necessarily characterized by conceptual terms; namely - the content of the experience is entirely built of ...
5
votes
2answers
183 views

What is the epistemic principle behind the fact that a digital photo is considered more reliable evidence of an event than a drawing by a human?

In court or in a police investigation, a digital photo is considered as solid evidence of an event having occurred, but a drawing by a person who has witnessed the event wouldn't be taken as ...
4
votes
5answers
79 views

Is it possible for two different theories to describe nature correctly without one being reductible into the other?

I suppose the whole thing is already in the title but if I shed some light on the centre of my doubt... In the macroscopic world we tend to have our objects of study "right at hand" but when we start ...
4
votes
2answers
65 views

What does “the fact that P causes Q” mean?

I'm reading the paper "A Causal theory of knowing" written by Goldman. In the paper, he present the following as conditions of knowledge(S knows P): 1) it is the case that P 2) S believes that P ...
1
vote
0answers
43 views

Is this proper counter-example to Causal theory of knowledge?

Causal theory of knowledge says: S knows P iff (1) It is the case that P (2) S believes P (3) there is appropriate causal connection between the fact that P and S's belief of P. I construct a ...
40
votes
9answers
4k views

How can an uneducated but rational person differentiate between science and religion?

I recently found myself unable to respond to the statement "But the big bang theory is just another creation myth!" during a science vs religion argument. I found it very difficult to explain the ...