| You are here: | About>Religion & Spirituality>Agnosticism / Atheism |
![]() | Agnosticism / Atheism |
Topics
Does God Exist?What is Atheism?What is Agnosticism?Myths About AtheismQuestions About AtheismAdvice for AtheistsAtheist Activism & PoliticsSkeptics, Critical ThinkingEthics and MoralitySecular, Religious HumanismEvolution & CreationismChurch/State SeparationReligious Right, ExtremismReligion & TheismBible Analysis, Commentary |
knowledge
Definition: A common philosophical definition of knowledge is a justified, true belief. What this means is that for any belief to qualify as knowledge, your must first be justified in believing it, and second it must actually be a true proposition. If you believe that all crows are black without ever having any experience with crows or birds, then that belief does not qualify as knowledge. It may be true - but you weren't rationally justified in believing it. Similarly, if you believe that all dogs are large because you have never encountered a small dog, that also would not qualify as knowledge. The belief may have some reasonable justification, but the claim simply isn't true. Verification is the process by which we make sure that what hear has some basis in truth. This is vital because we are fallible - it isn't true that any idea which occurs to us is correct. Since it makes no sense to say that a person knows something which is false (i.e., that 2 + 2 = 5), we must make some effort to verify information before being able to properly say that we know it. Epistemology, or the study of knowledge, has focused in the West on the problem of justification: precisely what, if anything, can constitute adequate justification for knowledge? One debate is between rationalists and empiricists who disagree about the sources which might provide evidence. Another debate occurs over the question of certainty, with fallibilists and skeptics doubting that certainty can be achieved. The question of knowledge also has implications for the philosophy of the mind. If someone can be said to have knowledge, then it also follows that they must have a mind - thus, understanding knowledge can lead to understanding about the mind. Is knowledge contained in the physical brain, or is it held by some other, non-material entity labeled "mind"? There are also three general categories of knowledge which should be distinguished. The first is factual or propositional knowledge - this is when we make statements which are factually correct. For example: I know that Germany fought in World War II. The second is procedural knowledge - this is when we know how to go about doing something. Examples would include gymnastics or juggling - and these point out that procedural knowledge involves more than reading a book. Reading about how to juggle is not the same as actually being able to do it. When someone claims to know how to juggle, we assume that they can actually perform the act rather than that they've merely read an instruction manual. The third type is the knowledge of personal experience, which is the type meant when someone says "I know war" or "I know pain." In these instances, the person can draw upon personal experiences not otherwise available to others. Also Known As: none Alternate Spellings: none Common Misspellings: none Related Resources:
|
| |||||||||
All Topics | Email Article | | | ![]() |
| Advertising Info | News & Events | Work at About | SiteMap | Reprints | Help | Our Story | Be a Guide |
| User Agreement | Ethics Policy | Patent Info. | Privacy Policy | ©2008 About, Inc., A part of The New York Times Company. All rights reserved. |


