St John’s Grammar School - Stage 2 Philosophy

Epistemology – Name ______

Epistemology is the study of how we know things. How do we form knowledge?

What is Knowledge? Knowledge is different from information. A phone book, for example, contains information. It does not contain knowledge. What about the internet? Every time we do a Google search and examine the results we look over information which may or may not be helpful to us.

Knowledge involves more than information. It involves a personalisation of the knowledge by linking it with what we already know. For example, information from a phone book as we isolate the information that we need, and internalise it, and possible remember it, in a personal way. It involves some personal attachment to the information and a sense of personal usefulness and meaning. A phone number, for example, may become important knowledge for us because it becomes a means to contact someone important in our lives. Knowledge contains a layer of personal meaning.

There is also a sense in which knowledge must be judged by us to be true, if it is to be personally relevant. We tend to disregard those false starts where we develop knowledge which turns out to be false. Knowledge must be internalised (linked to what we already know), must be valued as true for us, and incorporates a layer of personal meaning.

Revision – Knowledge in a Metaphysical Sense Debates over the nature of knowledge go back at least as far as Plato, and we have discussed some of these during our discussions of metaphysics and the nature of being human.

External Knowledge The X Files television show features the saying that, “The truth is out there”. The underlying premise here is that knowledge exists externally to ourselves and we can discover it. Scientists, tend to hold this view as they conduct experiments to discover knowledge.

In the Argument section of the course in Term 1 we looked at the process of induction as a way of creating new knowledge (in contrast to deduction where the conclusion is entailed in the premises). Scientists use the process of induction to make generalisations about the facts they discover about the natural world. This is how they establish knowledge.

Descartes method of doubting everything unless rational proof can be established is another example of this form of knowledge. His method is known as Cartesian Doubt.

Mathematics is another area of knowledge which is external and which relies on reason. Mathematicians talk of discovering new areas of maths as if this knowledge has its own existence.

Internal Knowledge What knowledge is of most interest to you? Existentialists would argue that external knowledge, as discussed above, is not as important as an internal knowledge of yourself. The saying, “Be true to yourself” (or, as Shakespeare put it, “To thy own self be true”,) implies that we must have internal and subjective knowledge of ourselves. Our fears, hopes, beliefs, values and attitudes for a core knowledge of ourselves which constitute the essential knowledge of living our life each day.

Many religions also encourage us to look inside ourselves to find knowledge. Buddhism, for example talks of knowing the oneness of the universe in an internal way.

David Rawnsley - St John’s Grammar School, Belair 1 Rationalism and Empiricism Rationalism – famous Rationalists such as Descartes emphasised that knowledge is developed through our minds and our sense of reason. This is particularly true of Mathematical knowledge. A perfect circle, for example, can only exist as a concept in our minds. All physical circles are only approximations.

Empiricism, on the other hand argues that knowledge is gained or developed through the use of our senses. Scientists, for example, use sense data constantly in establishing empirical claims. As you eat your tea or ride to school the sensory input forms the basis of your knowledge.

Descartes worry about Existentialism was that our senses sometimes deceive us and we cannot be sure of what they are telling us. He sited mirages, hallucinations and dreams as examples.

Epistemology The discussion above is useful in understanding knowledge but it is metaphysical in nature. Epistemology is different from Metaphysics and does not speculate about the nature of knowledge. Instead it focuses on how we know things. This is obviously an area in which Psychology, and recent brain research in particular, have much to contribute. However, the starting point in most discussions of Epistemology is perception. Following this, we need to look at how we change our perceptions into knowledge.

Perception Any information which comes to us through our senses must first be perceived by us. However, as Descartes pointed out nearly 400 years ago, our senses often deceive us. (This is partly why he abandoned sensory based knowledge for rational based knowledge.) We have looked at a number of optical illusions and sense deceptions in class in order to reinforce this point.

What are some of the ways in which our perception is influenced?

1.

2.

3.

4.

5.

David Rawnsley - St John’s Grammar School, Belair 2 Scientific method – the generation of scientific knowledge

The traditional concept of scientific method is that it builds inductively from observations. Scientists observe the world and notice things. From their observations, they form theories about the world. These are examples of inductive knowledge. P1 – This banana fell when I dropped it. P2 – This computer fell when I dropped it. For example, the observation that objects fall when P3 – This paper fell when I dropped it. released, if repeated often enough, might lead to the P4 – This book fell when I dropped it. induction to a generalisation that all objects fall when C – All objects fall when they are dropped. released. This is confirmed by further observations. Inductive observations often become scientific laws when they have been supported with many observations.

Scientific laws can be used to predict what will happen and this becomes a deductive prediction, For example:

P1 – All objects fall when released. In science, Induction to a generalisation is used to generate P2 – I will release this apple. scientific laws. Deduction is used to test the laws in specific C – It will fall. circumstances.

Problems with deductive arguments occur in only one of two ways: either the logic is not cogent or the premises are not true. However, this deductive argument is cogent (logical). Therefore, if for some reason the conclusion does not occur in practice, then the fault must be in one of the premises. If the second premise has been carried out successfully, then the fault must be with the law represented in the first premise. Usually when this is the case, scientists will go back to more observations to modify their law. For example, they may modify it to ‘All objects heavier than air will fall when released.’

A common criticism of this theory is that observations do not occur in the same sense that a camera takes a photo. People observe what they want to observe. Consider the observation statements made about the sinking of the titanic. Are they all true? P1 – All objects fall when released. P2 – I will release this helium filled balloon. C – It will fall. Consider the article on Science from Warburton’s book Philosophy: The Basics1. Read pages 109-111 What is the simple view of science?

What is meant by an observation being objective?

What is the sequence of events which leads to the establishment of a ‘Law of Nature’?

In making predictions what do scientists assume about the regularity of events in the physical world?

1 Warburton, N. (1992) Philosophy: The Basics, 2nd Edition, Routledge, New York David Rawnsley - St John’s Grammar School, Belair 3 Read pages 111-113 What criticism is made of the act of observation? Give an example of your own to illustrate the point.

Warburton argues that in observation statements theory always comes before observation. What theory is embedded in each of the following observation statements?

 The north end of the compass shifted away from north when the magnet was placed next to it.

 Sue took two panadol and shortly her headache went away.

(As an aside, without theory, why would a person observe the taking of the two tablets in preference to taking the glass of water, lying down, having some coffee, etc? This is how the theory shapes the observation.)

Read the section on The Problem of Induction on pages 113-115 and 116 (It seems to work) Does induction create new knowledge?

What is wrong with the general proof of induction that each time it has been used in the past it has usually worked and therefore each time it will be used in the future it will probably work?

Read pages 118-120 Can scientific laws be proven true?

Outline Popper’s idea of falsification.

Imagine that you are kidnapped by aliens and placed on their planet where some things appear to be similar to things that you are used to on earth. What is the role of induction in the development of your knowledge of the planet? Include discussion of observation, theory and falsification as part of your answer.

David Rawnsley - St John’s Grammar School, Belair 4