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

Briefly explain why knowledge requires justification

Extracts from this document...


Briefly explain why knowledge requires justification Plato said that knowledge was justified, true, belief. That is to say that there are three conditions to be met, in order for something to be considered knowledge. Firstly, according to Plato, the subject of the knowledge should be true. For example, I cannot know, that 1+1=3, because 1+1=2. Furthermore, knowledge also holds the condition of Belief. In order to know something, you must believe it. For example, I cannot know that I am writing an essay, if I do not believe that I am writing one, otherwise I would have no knowledge of doing so, as I would not acknowledge my doing so. The third and final condition for knowledge, if Plato's definition of knowledge is used, is Justification. In order to know something, must be justified. For example, if there is no evidence for something - that is no evidence or foundation leading to my belief - then I cannot say that I know something, as there would be no reason to believe it, or capacity to explain why I believe it. ...read more.


Through the responses to the Gettier problem we can begin to see why there is the necessity of justification for knowledge. When I believe that I have knowledge of Fred in the room, my justification of it, is that I am looking at Fred (although I was looking at Bob). One response to the Gettier problem is the idea of the 'No false belief condition'. In short the condition states that 'Beliefs cannot be based on a false belief'. I based my knowledge of Fred being in the room, on the false belief that I was looking at Fred. In order to have knowledge of Fred being in the room, it must be based on a justification/belief that is not false. Knowledge without a justification can be taken as having a false justification - there is not justification to speak of - so a justification, but only a non-false one, is required for knowledge. Another response is the 'Defeasibility condition'. This condition dictates that 'something is known as long as there is no evidence to the contrary'. ...read more.


However, I am mistaken in this belief, as it is Bob, so my belief and justification do not constitute as knowledge. The final response is the 'Causal connection condition'. The condition dictates that 'there must be a causal connection between the knowledge and the belief'. So when I say that I know Fred is in the room, I should not be able to; as there is not causal connection between my looking at Bob and Fred being in the room. The fact that Fred is in the room is irrelevant, as my justification is made false. From these arguments we can further see why there is the necessity of Justification. Without it, knowledge could not be claimed as there would be no basis for it, as there would be no basis for the beliefs required to say that we actually know something. Regardless of whether something that we may say we know is true by accident, we cannot know it if the basis of our beliefs - the justifications - are false. ?? ?? ?? ?? ...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 ...

    Even in the most constrained experiment, the researchers may observe patterns in the data that lead them to develop new theories. Comparison of Properties Deduction 1. In a valid deductive argument, all of the content of the conclusion is present, at least implicitly, in the premises. Deduction is nonampliative 2.

  2. How might we combat the Gettier Problem? In giving your answer set forth two ...

    The third and final part of the definition is that we need Justification. When we have good evidence and we have good reasoning of that evidence we can say that we are justified in our beliefs. So in accordance with all the above, to have knowledge then it must be.

  1. Theory of Knowledge

    Some philosophers dismiss the theory of na�ve realism, claiming that it is useless because it ignores key elements of existence and perception such as the way things look, feel or sound.

  2. Theory Of Knowledge essay

    This confirmation of the hypothesis process is the part of the model that encompasses inductive reasoning, as when using this method one only has access to a limited number of events. Although the Hypothetico model was developed to incorporate advantages of both types of verifications, by using inductive reasoning as

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