Interpretive questions unresolved attempted analyses, andĬounterexamples thereto, are often proposed without its being madeĮxplicit whether the claims are intended as metaphysical or conceptual Project of analyzing knowledge leave these metaphilosophical In practice, many epistemologists engaging in the On one version of thisĪpproach, the concept knowledge is literally composed of moreīasic concepts, linked together by something like Boolean operators.Ĭonsequently, an analysis is subject not only to extensional accuracy,īut to facts about the cognitive representation of knowledge and otherĮpistemic notions. Theorists think of the analysis of knowledge as distinctivelyĬonceptual-to analyse knowledge is to limn the List of conditions involving S and p to obtain. That what it is for S to know p is for some Knowledge will be committed to something like the metaphysical claim On this interpretation of the project ofĪnalyzing knowledge, the defender of a successful analysis of Knowledge-compare a chemist who analyzes a sample to learn itsĬhemical composition. Literally to identify the components that make up According to some theorists, to analyze knowledge is Knowledge, although just what more is required is a matter of someĬontroversy. J would probably not be sufficient for an analysis of Consequently, hypothetical thoughtĮxperiments provide appropriate test cases for various analyses, as weĮven a necessary biconditional linking knowledge to some state A proper analysis of knowledge shouldĪt least be a necessary truth. It might be that there are possible cases of knowledge It is not enough merely to pick out the actual extension of knowledge.Įven if, in actual fact, all cases of S knowing that pĪre cases of j, and all cases of the latter are cases of theįormer, j might fail as an analysis of knowledge. Individually necessary and jointly sufficient for S to have That p if and only if j, where j indicates theĪnalysans: paradigmatically, a list of conditions that are A proposedĪnalysis consists of a statement of the following form: S knows Where “ S” refers to the knowing subject, and Knowledge literature is paradigmatically expressed in English by The propositional knowledge that is the analysandum of the analysis of Ride a bicycle”) is subject to some debate (see Stanley 2011 and
MERE NOTION DEFINITION HOW TO
Is”) and especially knowledge-how (“Susan knows how to
Knowledge at issue in other “knowledge” locutions inĮnglish, such as knowledge-where (“Susan knows where she
The relation between propositional knowledge and the Propositional knowledge should be distinguishedįrom knowledge of “acquaintance”, as obtains when Susan
That Alyssa is a musician, she has knowledge of the proposition thatĪlyssa is a musician. We mean knowledge of a proposition-for example, if Susan knows It take to know something? By “propositional knowledge”, Propositional knowledge, thoroughly answering the question, what does More particularly, the project of analysing knowledge is to stateĬonditions that are individually necessary and jointly sufficient for Knowledge concerns the attempt to articulate in what exactly this kind To be more like a way of getting at the truth. Something? It’s not enough just to believe it-weĭon’t know the things we’re wrong about. What exactly is the difference? What does it take to know For any person, there are some things they know, and some things theyĭon’t.
0 kommentar(er)
