[lit-ideas] Re: Can You Imagine 2 + 2 = 5?
- From: Donal McEvoy <donalmcevoyuk@xxxxxxxxxxx>
- To: lit-ideas@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Date: Fri, 23 Nov 2007 10:07:43 +0000 (GMT)
--- Robert Paul <rpaul@xxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > 1. Why should such non-philosophical usage ground the philosophical
> debate?
>
> Again, what debate?
Debate as to whether knowledge should be conceived as JustifiedTrueBelief and
therefore that 'I know x' implies 'x is true' (otherwise I don't _know_ it,
merely believe it).
<snip>
> There is a standard take on it, certainly. If I know that Ursula lives
> in Canada, then Ursula lives in Canada. If I believe (some would say
> 'merely' believe) she does, then she may not.
This just restates, one-sidedly, what is in fact up for debate viz.whether
knowledge should be conceived this way. In a previous post I sketched some of
Popper's reasons why it should not. These remain unaddressed.
Though there are many usages which no doubt reflect a JTB-view of knowledge,
Popper discusses usages that reflect a conception that is of 'objective
knowledge' in his sense [see: 'Objective Knowledge', for example], including
I recall an OED definition.
Might I add another example of a usage of 'knowledge' as a concept where not
only is the usage readily intelligible but where it is a clear that the
concept is deployed so that 'knowing x' does not entail 'x is true':
"Everything You Know Is Wrong", by 'Weird Al' Yankovicz.
Donal
Stooping as far as needed to match Robert Paul's examples
___________________________________________________________
Want ideas for reducing your carbon footprint? Visit Yahoo! For Good
http://uk.promotions.yahoo.com/forgood/environment.html
------------------------------------------------------------------
To change your Lit-Ideas settings (subscribe/unsub, vacation on/off,
digest on/off), visit www.andreas.com/faq-lit-ideas.html
Other related posts:
