• Join over 1.2 million students every month
  • Accelerate your learning by 29%
  • Unlimited access from just £6.99 per month

A knower would say "I know" if it has a higher probability of being more certain that "I believe". In this paper, I will explore the types of knowledge, gained through reason, and how they

Extracts from this document...


Although sometimes the words 'know' and 'believe' are used interchangeably, they are very different. A knower would say "I know" if it has a higher probability of being more certain that "I believe". In this paper, I will explore the types of knowledge, gained through reason, and how they differ with beliefs. One's beliefs can also be described as one's personal ideas or faiths, not distinguishable of right and wrong. Beliefs are not certain, and it is not supported by sufficient evidence. In other words, it contains the element of doubt, unlike knowledge. For example, when I say that "I believe it will snow tomorrow", it is not the same as it will snow tomorrow, because it might. This becomes a very significant difference, changing the entire tone of the statement and thus making the statement appear weak and less trustworthy. Belief is a personal instinct, based on each person's individual emotions. Therefore, there is no right or wrong in a personal belief. In the previous example, if there were snow on the next day, the knower can be said to have a strong instinct. It was just simply a presumption, not based on any real evidence. However, if there were no snow, the statement could not have been considered incorrect because it was not certain to begin with and by adding "I believe" demonstrates the possibility that snow would not fall. ...read more.


Everyone in that class share the same rudimentary knowledge. Knowledge, unlike belief, is distinguishable of right and wrong. In the example with the snow, if I say, "I know it will snow tomorrow", it presents two possibilities. The possibility that I am right, that it snows tomorrow or the other possibility that I am wrong, and it will not snow tomorrow. Because knowledge can be differentiated between right and wrong, it is possible to gain knowledge from sharing. If others were to tell me something, it would add to my knowledge. From this, everyone can become more knowledgeable. Knowledge can be broken down into two components, perceptual knowledge and analytical knowledge. Perceptual knowledge is strictly automatic and it deals with our senses - see, feel, touch, smell, and taste. With your sense perceptions, you can use reason and thus obtain basic knowledge. For example, I know that the grass is green because I see it or I know that I am cold because I feel it. This type of personal knowledge is more justified than belief because it is from experience, and based on reasoning. A clear distinction should be made between experience and knowledge. Even though knowledge can be obtained from experience, not all knowledge has to be based on experience. ...read more.


An example of syllogism is if all men are liars, and Socrates is a man; therefore, Socrates is a liar. However, the truth of this statement depends on the word "if". Only if all men were liars would then Socrates be a liar. This is using reasoning to attain knowledge, of the potential fact that Socrates is a liar. If there is sufficient evidence, or enough reason, to support this, then this must be justified. For example, if Socrates has lied in the past, this provides the confirmation that Socrates is a liar. This type of knowledge described is factual prepositional knowledge; it is to know that something is what it is. The two distinctive types of knowledge are both based on the use of reason instead of personal emotion. Certain people have very defined view in which they are emotionally committed. They know that their personal view is the absolute truth, thus view everything else with a closed mind. However, emotions bias our perception, and the knower should keep an open mind for reasoned arguments. However, there are always exceptions in which we should use our mind to judge the morals to feel sympathetic, for example, and therefore use emotion over reason. In order to make the most rational decision, the knower should take into consideration the situation and use a balance of reason and emotion. ?? ?? ?? ?? 1 ...read more.

The above preview is unformatted text

This student written piece of work is one of many that can be found in our AS and A Level Philosophy section.

Found what you're looking for?

  • Start learning 29% faster today
  • 150,000+ documents available
  • Just £6.99 a month

Not the one? Search for your essay title...
  • Join over 1.2 million students every month
  • Accelerate your learning by 29%
  • Unlimited access from just £6.99 per month

See related essaysSee related essays

Related AS and A Level Philosophy essays

  1. Discuss the characteristics of the scientific method which makes it superior over other methods ...

    Rationalism Rationalism is a philosophical movement which attempts to study the universe using reason, in the form of deductive and mathematical methods, rather than sense experience. Descartes, for example, tried to deduce what God's world is like from the axioms of divine existence and goodness.

  2. Synoptic Study, Satre, Engels and Marx

    Man however distinguishes its self form the animals by developing our methods of production, 'The species-nature of animal is an eternal repetition, that of man is transformation, development and change'. Marx and Engels assert that it is mans nature to be creative and through his labor is able to alter nature.

  1. Proof and Probability in Arguing for God's Existence.

    Because the premises are not known to be true by those who dispute the conclusion. The first premise does not provide a common starting-point for devising a persuasive argument. As Plantinga says: 'no one who didn't already accept the conclusion, would accept the first premise'.1 Plantinga thinks that the ontological argument is like this.

  2. There is no Reason to Assume I will exist after my Death.

    Plato's theory was really a discussion on the nature of the soul rather than its existence. Plato assumes the souls existence from the start and so did not consider the question of a life after death at all. Plato said the phenomenon of deju-vu was proof of the existence of

  1. `I know God exists, because I have an idea of perfection Discuss whether knowledge ...

    Initially, empiricist John Locke labelled the mind as a 'blank slate', claiming that all knowledge must be derived from experience. Inevitably, if Locke's assumption is correct, it is highly unlikely that we possess innate knowledge. Locke dismissed the rationalists view of 'innate knowledge' and subsequently went on to claim that

  2. What are the limitations on our personal liberty? Are all of them justified?

    With this as a background, the U.K. governments have continued to impose unlimited fines and prison sentences of up to seven years for those in possession of Class A drugs, a tactic that non-dependant on your political ideology, from a utilitarian or consequentialist perspective is clearly not working.

  1. Theory of Knowledge

    philosophical ideas such as representative realism, it maintains that all there is to be perceived is the physical object itself, with no subjective components such as sense data. Furthermore, it claims that objects continue to exist when not being perceived, a fact which Berkley argues against in his theory of Idealism.

  2. Do you know you are reading this question?

    Reliabilism is another method Quine explored to be able to justify knowledge. It is true to say that many of the beliefs we hold and would generally count as knowledge are seemingly difficult to provide the justification for. Such as general knowledge that Germany is a relatively young unified country;

  • Over 160,000 pieces
    of student written work
  • Annotated by
    experienced teachers
  • Ideas and feedback to
    improve your own work