[lit-ideas] Re: Popper and Grice on 'knowledge'
- From: Omar Kusturica <omarkusto@xxxxxxxxx>
- To: lit-ideas@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Date: Thu, 5 Mar 2015 17:17:01 +0100
It seems to me that Grice is confused about the Principle of Sufficient
Reason, and might have done well to read Schopenhauer. The Principle of
Sufficient Reason appears as causality in the physical world, e.g. my
pushing the door causes it to open. The PRS does NOT appear as causality in
the worlds of beliefs; there a belief is justified if there is sufficient
ground for holding it, whatever the origin of the belief. In order to say
that I know that the Earth revolves around the sun, I need not demonstrate
that my belief is caused by the Earth revolving around the Sun, as opposed
to learning it at school. It's enough to understand the reasoning that lead
the astronomers to believe that it is so.
O.K.
On Thu, Mar 5, 2015 at 4:51 PM, Omar Kusturica <omarkusto@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> I know that 2+2=4
>
> Assuming that this is true, in what sense is my knowledge caused by some
> state of affairs ?
>
> I am not sure what is gained by trying to elucidate a fuzzy notion of
> 'knowledge' by employing an arguably even fuzzier notion of causality.
>
> O.K.
>
> On Thu, Mar 5, 2015 at 4:22 PM, Donal McEvoy <donalmcevoyuk@xxxxxxxxxxx>
> wrote:
>
>> >I wonder how much responds to Popper's programme, and how much to
>> Grice's
>> qualified Gettier view that knowledge is a belief, which is true, and
>> CAUSED
>> by the state of affairs that is posited by the 'that-' clause that
>> ascribes 'knowledge' in the first place!>
>>
>> Assuming no more than that JLS at some point read "Objective Knowledge",
>> or at least got past the first page, he will have seen Popper clearly
>> claim, on page one, that modern "epistemic logic" is mostly a misguided and
>> misconceived irrelevance when viewed in the light of the theory of
>> knowledge defended in that book.
>>
>> There is no solution to Gettier Problems which rehabilitates 'JTB
>> theory': Gett-Probs are like the so-called 'paradoxes of induction' in that
>> they only create problems and paradoxes for those who cling to the idea
>> "knowledge = JTB" of the idea there is "induction" respectively (in fact,
>> the so-called paradoxes of induction prove to be equivalent to a
>> demonstrable theorem in the calculus of probability i.e. they are not
>> unavoidable paradoxes at all but rather only unavoidable if we cling to the
>> idea of "induction"). Ditto for "Gett-Probs".
>>
>> Dnl
>>
>>
>> On Thursday, 5 March 2015, 13:42, "dmarc-noreply@xxxxxxxxxxxxx" <
>> dmarc-noreply@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>>
>>
>> Just for the record, there is a new handbook of KEYWORD: epistemic logic.
>>
>> Just mentioning it, to share the contents!
>>
>> I wonder how much responds to Popper's programme, and how much to
>> Grice's
>> qualified Gettier view that knowledge is a belief, which is true, and
>> CAUSED
>> by the state of affairs that is posited by the 'that-' clause that
>> ascribes 'knowledge' in the first place!
>>
>> Epistemic logic and, more generally, logics of knowledge and belief,
>> originated with philosophers such as Jaakko Hintikka and David Lewis in
>> the
>> early 1960s. Since then, such logics have played a significant role not
>> only in
>> philosophy, but also in computer science, artificial intelligence, and
>> economics. This handbook reports significant progress in a field that,
>> while
>> more mature, continues to be very active. This book should make it easier
>> for
>> new researchers to enter the field, and give experts a chance to
>> appreciate work in related areas. The book starts with a gentle
>> introduction to the
>> logics of knowledge and belief; it gives an overview of the area and the
>> material covered in the book. The following eleven chapters, each
>> written by
>> a leading researcher (or researchers), cover the topics of only knowing,
>> awareness, knowledge and probability, knowledge and time, the dynamics
>> of
>> knowledge and of belief, model checking, game theory, agency, knowledge
>> and
>> ability, and security protocols. The chapters have been written so that
>> they
>> can be read independently and in any order. Each chapter ends with a
>> section of notes that provides some historical background, including
>> references,
>> and a detailed bibliography.
>>
>> Cheers,
>>
>> Speranza
>>
>>
>>
>> ------------------------------------------------------------------
>> 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:
