Monday, November 15, 2010

The Pretheoretic view ("Standard View")

Epistemology (described by Wikipedia as "The branch of philosophy concerned with the nature and scope of knowledge) asks the questions, "What is knowledge?" and "How do we know what we know?". The Standard View of knowledge attempts to answer this questions. It reflects a simpler time where knowledge derives from judgements and commonsense like "Torturing innocents in bad" or "New Jersey borders New York". According to Richard Feldman's Epistemology "We know a large variety of things in categories", as one could characterize the former example as knowledge of morality and the later example knowledge of geography. According to Feldman, sources of this kind of knowledge include...
     *Perception
     *Sensation
     *Memory
     *Testimony of others
     *Introspection
     *Reasoning or inference
     *Rational Insight

So...what actually is knowledge itself? The simple answer, what is reffered to by Feldman as the "traditional analysis of K", in accordance with The Standard View is justified, true, belief. The justification for this knowledge comes through any of the previously mentioned sources of knowledge...if one believes New Jersey borders New York he is justified by remembering a map he saw or a trip he took. For another example, if the kitchen smells like gumbo whenever mother makes gumbo and today the kitchen smells like gumbo, we are justified in believing, thus we have the knowledge justified by remembering past experiences, mother made gumbo today and unless Glade has come out with gumbo scent air freshener we are probably correct in our assumption.

As a pragmatist I see the justification for belief being if or not it works. Smelling gumbo has a good shot at actually leading me to gumbo, hence my belief is justified. If Glade actually does come up with gumbo scented air freshener but I am unaware of it and I follow a scent and I do not find gumbo, that does not make my belief unjustified, but I do not have knowlege because it is impossible to say you know something that is not true. However, if I stopped following the scent of gumbo altogether I may never find any gumbo at all. The Standard View may not be fool proof at leading us to truth (the existence of gumbo in this example), but there are many times when this justified, true, belief breeds truthful knowledge which is evident in all the times we do find that pot of gumbo.

1 comment:

  1. OK, nice looking blog.

    First: I think you might be confusing the Standard View - which is the *pre-theoretic*, pre-philosophers-messing-with-it view. The JTB stuff, that's what Feldman calls the TAK.

    Nice view on where knowledge primarily comes from... what other sources, besides sense & memory, do we pre-theoretically think provide knowledge?

    The pragmatic view seems pretty well described there... but watch that confusing terminology. False knowledge (on most of these accounts we're learning) isn't knowledge at all, because K=JTB. 'Truthful K' is redundant.

    [Familiarity shown for Pragmatism.]

    ReplyDelete