[lit-ideas] Re: knowledge and belief briefly
- From: "Walter C. Okshevsky" <wokshevs@xxxxxx>
- To: lit-ideas@xxxxxxxxxxxxx, Omar Kusturica <omarkusto@xxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Tue, 24 Dec 2013 12:53:29 -0330
I submit that the idea of "false knowledge" is self-contradictory. If I k-that
P, then P can't be false. If P is false, then I don't/can't k-that P. (Although
I can of course k-that P is false.)
Let's not conflate k-that and k-about or k-of (the latter 2 in the "familiar
sense of k" or "k by acquaintance" as per Russell). I can k-of or k-about, be
familiar with, all sorts of accounts. That does not mean I k-that anything.
Try this: I may claim to k-that natural selection is different from sexual
selection in Darwin's theory. The cogency of my claim that I k-that the 2
differ depends upon whether I believe they differ. And that belief is itself
dependent/conditional epistemically upon my having the relevant justification
for that belief. Otherwise I believe irrationally.
Or not?
Walter O
Quoting Omar Kusturica <omarkusto@xxxxxxxxx>:
> If I say that an eight-grader knows Newtonian physics, what I probably mean
> is that e.g. he knows the laws of motion as Newton stated them. For example,
> he knows that the Third Law of Motion states that for every action there is
> an equal and opposite reaction. This knowledge is true in the sense that this
> is indeed what the Third Law of Motion states, irrespective of whether the
> Law itself is true. But if he doesn't know what the Third Law of Motion
> states, or if he states it incorrectly, then he doesn't know Newtonian
> physics. Similarly, if I say that I know the Book of Kings, I mean that I
> have studied the book and that I know its content, irrespective of whether
> the historical account in the book is true. I am still not persuaded that
> such examples represent instances of 'false knowledge', which I suspect they
> are meant to be.
>
> O.K.
>
>
>
>
> On Sunday, December 22, 2013 8:10 PM, David Ritchie <profdritchie@xxxxxxxxx>
> wrote:
>
> Wensleydale, the chicken. She who is one with the Druids.
>
> David
> On Dec 22, 2013, at 1:39 AM, John McCreery wrote:
>
> > Shropshire does the trick for me. A blue sharp aged cheddar. A transcendent
> and irrefutable argument for cheese.
> >
> > John
> >
> > Sent from my iPad
> >
> >> On 2013/12/22, at 16:16, David Ritchie <profdritchie@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> >>
> >>
> >> I can't recall whether I believe or I know that today is the solstice.
> Wensleydale will no doubt put me right.
> >>
> >> David Ritchie,
> >> Somewhere,
> >> Heading towards the
> Light------------------------------------------------------------------
> >> To change your Lit-Ideas settings (subscribe/unsub, vacation on/off,
> >> digest on/off), visit www.andreas.com/faq-lit-ideas.html
>
> > ------------------------------------------------------------------
> > To change your Lit-Ideas settings (subscribe/unsub, vacation on/off,
> > digest on/off), visit www.andreas.com/faq-lit-ideas.html
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------
> To change your Lit-Ideas settings (subscribe/unsub, vacation on/off,
> digest on/off), visit www.andreas.com/faq-lit-ideas.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:
