4.3 Post-Gettier theories of knowledge
3 min read•august 9, 2024
Post-Gettier theories of knowledge emerged to address the shortcomings of the traditional tripartite theory. These approaches, like causal and , aim to provide more robust definitions of knowledge that can withstand Gettier-style counterexamples.
, , , and offer diverse perspectives on what constitutes knowledge. Each theory grapples with the complexities of justification, truth, and belief, seeking to refine our understanding of how we acquire and validate knowledge.
Causal and Tracking Theories
Causal Theory and False Lemmas
Top images from around the web for Causal Theory and False Lemmas
The Importance of Being Causal · Issue 2.3, Summer 2020 View original
Is this image relevant?
Definitions of knowledge - Wikipedia View original
Is this image relevant?
¿Es conocimiento la creencia verdadera justificada? Los contraejemplos Gettier | Papel en Blanco View original
Is this image relevant?
The Importance of Being Causal · Issue 2.3, Summer 2020 View original
Is this image relevant?
Definitions of knowledge - Wikipedia View original
Is this image relevant?
1 of 3
Top images from around the web for Causal Theory and False Lemmas
The Importance of Being Causal · Issue 2.3, Summer 2020 View original
Is this image relevant?
Definitions of knowledge - Wikipedia View original
Is this image relevant?
¿Es conocimiento la creencia verdadera justificada? Los contraejemplos Gettier | Papel en Blanco View original
Is this image relevant?
The Importance of Being Causal · Issue 2.3, Summer 2020 View original
Is this image relevant?
Definitions of knowledge - Wikipedia View original
Is this image relevant?
1 of 3
- of knowledge proposes knowledge results from a causal connection between the fact and the belief
- developed this theory to address Gettier problems
- Requires beliefs to be caused by the facts they are about
- Addresses some Gettier cases by eliminating beliefs based on false premises
- No false lemmas principle ensures intermediate steps in reasoning are true
- Challenges arise with cases of deviant causal chains (strange coincidences leading to true beliefs)
Tracking Theories of Knowledge
- Tracking theories focus on the relationship between beliefs and truth across different scenarios
- 's theory requires beliefs to "track" the truth in nearby possible worlds
- stipulates if a proposition were false, the subject would not believe it
- requires if a proposition remains true in slightly different circumstances, the subject would still believe it
- Aims to account for our intuitions about knowledge in various counterfactual situations
- Faces difficulties with certain counterexamples (necessary truths, skeptical scenarios)
Reliabilism and Infallibilism
Reliabilism and its Variants
- Reliabilism posits knowledge stems from beliefs formed through reliable cognitive processes
- Alvin Goldman proposed this theory as an alternative to traditional justification requirements
- focuses on the reliability of the belief-forming method
- considers the overall reliability of the cognitive agent
- Addresses Gettier problems by emphasizing the importance of reliable belief formation
- Faces challenges with the generality problem (defining appropriate levels of generality for processes)
Infallibilism and Safety
- Infallibilism contends knowledge requires absolute certainty or infallible justification
- Historically associated with philosophers like Descartes
- Modern epistemologists generally reject strict infallibilism as too demanding
- emerges as a more moderate alternative to infallibilism
- Safety requires that in nearby possible worlds where the subject believes the proposition, it is true
- argues safety is necessary for knowledge
- Differs from sensitivity by focusing on nearby worlds where the belief is held, rather than where the proposition is false
Contextualism and Virtue Epistemology
Contextualism in Epistemology
- Contextualism proposes the truth conditions for knowledge attributions vary based on context
- and developed influential versions of contextualism
- Aims to resolve skeptical paradoxes by allowing knowledge standards to shift
- Ordinary contexts have lower standards for knowledge than skeptical contexts
- , the opposing view, maintains fixed standards for knowledge across contexts
- (Jason Stanley) attempts to reconcile contextualist insights with invariantism
Virtue Epistemology and Knowledge-First Approaches
- Virtue epistemology focuses on intellectual virtues or cognitive character traits
- 's virtue reliabilism combines reliabilism with virtue-based approaches
- 's pure virtue epistemology defines knowledge in terms of acts of intellectual virtue
- Aims to provide a unified account of epistemic evaluation (knowledge, understanding, wisdom)
- , proposed by , takes knowledge as the fundamental epistemic notion
- Reverses traditional analysis by defining other epistemic concepts in terms of knowledge
- Challenges the assumption that knowledge can be analyzed into more basic components
Key Terms to Review (29)
Adherence condition: The adherence condition refers to a requirement in epistemology that states for a belief to qualify as knowledge, it must be held consistently and steadfastly by the individual. This condition emphasizes the importance of not only having a true belief but also maintaining commitment to that belief, especially in the face of potential challenges or counter-evidence. It serves as a pivotal element in post-Gettier theories, which seek to refine our understanding of knowledge beyond the traditional definitions established before Gettier's work.
Agent reliabilism: Agent reliabilism is a theory of knowledge that emphasizes the importance of the reliability of the processes used by a knower in forming beliefs. It suggests that for a belief to count as knowledge, it must be produced by a cognitive process that reliably leads to true beliefs. This perspective shifts the focus from the justification of individual beliefs to the overall trustworthiness of the agent's belief-forming mechanisms.
Alvin Goldman: Alvin Goldman is a prominent philosopher known for his contributions to epistemology, particularly in the context of post-Gettier theories of knowledge. He is best recognized for advocating a reliableist approach, which emphasizes the importance of reliable processes in generating true beliefs as a way to address the issues raised by Gettier cases. Goldman's work has significantly shaped contemporary discussions about what constitutes knowledge and how we can better understand its nature.
Causal Theory: Causal theory is a philosophical perspective that asserts knowledge is fundamentally tied to the relationship between belief and the facts that cause those beliefs to be true. This theory emphasizes the importance of a causal connection in the justification of knowledge claims, suggesting that for a belief to count as knowledge, it must be caused in the right way by the relevant truth. It seeks to address the issues raised by Gettier cases by ensuring that there is a proper causal link between what one believes and the truth of that belief.
Contextualism: Contextualism is a philosophical approach to knowledge that emphasizes the significance of the context in which knowledge claims are made, suggesting that factors such as the speaker's intentions, the audience's background, and the situational factors can influence what counts as justified belief. This perspective allows for a flexible understanding of knowledge, particularly when responding to skepticism and considering external influences on justification.
David Lewis: David Lewis was a prominent 20th-century philosopher known for his work in metaphysics, philosophy of language, and epistemology. He is especially noted for his contributions to modal realism and his influence on discussions surrounding knowledge, belief, and skepticism. His perspectives often challenge traditional views, particularly in how we understand knowledge claims and the context in which they arise.
Duncan Pritchard: Duncan Pritchard is a prominent contemporary epistemologist known for his work on knowledge, particularly in relation to the Gettier problem and post-Gettier theories. His contributions have significantly shaped discussions around the nature of knowledge and the conditions under which it can be said to exist, addressing challenges that arise from traditional definitions of knowledge as justified true belief.
Epistemic Justification: Epistemic justification refers to the reasoning or evidence that supports a belief, making it reasonable to hold that belief as knowledge. This concept is crucial for distinguishing between mere opinion and knowledge, as it determines whether a belief is warranted based on the evidence available, which in turn influences our understanding of knowledge and its acquisition.
Epistemic Responsibility: Epistemic responsibility refers to the obligation individuals have to acquire, assess, and communicate knowledge in a reliable and ethical manner. This concept emphasizes that knowledge is not just about what one knows, but also how one comes to know it and the duties that accompany belief formation and dissemination. It highlights the importance of intellectual virtues and moral considerations in the pursuit of knowledge, connecting deeply with the value of knowledge, theories following Gettier problems, and virtue epistemology approaches.
Epistemic Virtue: Epistemic virtue refers to character traits or qualities that promote the acquisition and dissemination of knowledge. These virtues emphasize intellectual honesty, open-mindedness, diligence, and a commitment to truth. By fostering these traits, individuals can develop a more reliable and responsible approach to knowledge-seeking, which is especially important when addressing the challenges posed by Gettier cases and the subsequent theories aimed at refining our understanding of knowledge.
Ernest Sosa: Ernest Sosa is a prominent epistemologist known for his contributions to virtue epistemology, particularly regarding how knowledge is tied to the intellectual virtues of the knower. He argues that understanding knowledge requires considering the qualities that contribute to a person's ability to acquire true beliefs reliably. Sosa's work highlights both the reliability of cognitive faculties and the responsibilities of the knower in achieving justified belief.
Generalization Problem: The generalization problem refers to the challenge of justifying the extension of knowledge claims from specific instances to broader generalizations. It questions how we can know that what is true in particular cases holds true universally, especially in light of potential counterexamples. This issue is crucial in the context of post-Gettier theories, as it explores how knowledge can be defined and understood beyond simple justified true belief.
Infallibilism: Infallibilism is the epistemological view that for a belief to count as knowledge, it must be infallible or certain; that is, there must be no possibility of being wrong about it. This stance emphasizes the necessity of certainty in knowledge claims and is often contrasted with fallibilism, which accepts that knowledge can be fallible while still being justified.
Invariantism: Invariantism is the view in epistemology that the standards for knowledge claims do not change depending on context. It asserts that if a person has knowledge in one situation, they have knowledge in all situations where the same conditions apply, emphasizing a consistent standard for what counts as knowledge regardless of varying circumstances.
Keith Derose: Keith Derose is a prominent philosopher known for his contributions to epistemology, particularly in the areas of contextualism and responses to skepticism. His work challenges traditional views of knowledge by arguing that the truth conditions of knowledge claims can vary based on contextual factors, providing a fresh perspective on how we understand knowledge and belief.
Knowledge-as-true-belief: Knowledge-as-true-belief is the classical definition of knowledge that suggests knowledge consists of a belief that is true. This definition implies that for someone to know something, they must believe it, it must be true, and they must have justification for that belief. However, this view faced challenges, especially after the introduction of Gettier problems, which demonstrated scenarios where individuals could have justified true beliefs but still lack knowledge.
Knowledge-first epistemology: Knowledge-first epistemology is a philosophical approach that suggests knowledge should be the starting point for discussions about belief, justification, and truth. This perspective challenges traditional views by arguing that knowledge itself can provide the foundation for understanding other epistemic concepts, rather than relying solely on beliefs or justifications as initial concepts.
Linda Zagzebski: Linda Zagzebski is a prominent philosopher known for her work in epistemology, particularly her development of virtue epistemology, which emphasizes the importance of intellectual virtues in the acquisition and evaluation of knowledge. Her theories explore the intersection of epistemic responsibility and the virtues that foster reliable belief formation, which connect deeply with post-Gettier theories and the role of intellectual character in achieving true knowledge.
Lottery Paradox: The lottery paradox is a philosophical puzzle that highlights the conflict between our intuitive beliefs about knowledge and the principles of probability. It arises when we consider the situation where, in a fair lottery with many tickets, we can confidently say that any individual ticket will lose, yet we still recognize that one ticket must win. This paradox challenges our understanding of knowledge, particularly in distinguishing between justified true belief and the conditions for having knowledge.
Process Reliabilism: Process reliabilism is a theory of knowledge that suggests a belief is justified if it is produced by a reliable cognitive process, meaning the process consistently leads to true beliefs. This approach emphasizes the importance of the methods used to form beliefs, linking justification directly to the reliability of these methods. It connects justification to knowledge by arguing that if a belief arises from a reliable process, it is more likely to be true, thus contributing to our understanding of knowledge.
Reliabilism: Reliabilism is a theory in epistemology that suggests a belief is justified if it is produced by a reliable cognitive process, meaning that the process consistently leads to true beliefs. This approach shifts the focus from internal factors, such as the believer's perspective, to external factors, emphasizing the importance of how knowledge is acquired and the reliability of the methods used.
Robert Nozick: Robert Nozick was an American philosopher best known for his work in political philosophy and epistemology, particularly through his contributions to post-Gettier theories of knowledge. His influential ideas challenge traditional views on knowledge, emphasizing the role of external factors in determining what counts as knowledge, especially in the context of externalism and the conditions that must be met for justified belief.
Safety Condition: The safety condition is a principle in epistemology that states for a belief to qualify as knowledge, it must not only be true, but also safe from being false in nearby possible worlds. This means that if someone believes something based on a reliable process, it should be unlikely to be mistaken in similar situations, addressing concerns raised by skeptical scenarios and the Gettier problem.
Sensitivity condition: The sensitivity condition is a criterion in epistemology that states that if a person knows a proposition, then they must not only be justified in believing it but also that their belief must be sensitive to the truth of the proposition. This means that if the proposition were false, the person would not believe it. This condition plays a significant role in discussions about knowledge, particularly in addressing issues raised by Gettier problems and shaping post-Gettier theories. It is also crucial in evaluating the impact of external factors on knowledge claims and in assessing the reliability of truth-conducive processes.
Subject-sensitive invariantism: Subject-sensitive invariantism is a theory of knowledge that suggests that whether a person knows a proposition can depend on the subject's particular circumstances, while still maintaining that the truth conditions for knowledge remain invariant. This means that factors such as practical interests or stakes can influence the knowledge attribution to an individual, differing from traditional invariantist views where knowledge is solely based on objective conditions.
The problem of easy knowledge: The problem of easy knowledge refers to the challenge in epistemology regarding the acquisition of knowledge through seemingly trivial or insufficiently rigorous means. This concept raises questions about whether one can genuinely know something based solely on evidence that is too easily obtainable, thereby undermining the traditional standards for what constitutes justified true belief. It highlights concerns about whether knowledge can be obtained without a significant level of cognitive effort or deeper justification, particularly in light of Gettier cases that reveal flaws in previous definitions of knowledge.
Timothy Williamson: Timothy Williamson is a prominent philosopher known for his work in epistemology, particularly his contributions to understanding knowledge and its relation to belief, truth, and evidence. He challenges traditional views of knowledge by arguing that knowledge is a mental state that is not reducible to justified true belief or other post-Gettier theories, emphasizing the importance of the context in which knowledge claims are made.
Tracking Theories: Tracking theories are approaches to understanding knowledge that emphasize the connection between belief and the truth across possible worlds. These theories suggest that for someone to know a proposition, their belief must 'track' the truth in various relevant situations, ensuring that if the proposition were false, the individual would not believe it. This idea addresses concerns raised by Gettier cases and seeks to establish a more robust definition of knowledge by linking epistemic justification with the reliability of belief in relation to the truth.
Virtue Epistemology: Virtue epistemology is a theory of knowledge that emphasizes the role of intellectual virtues in the acquisition of knowledge. It connects the qualities and dispositions of the knower, such as open-mindedness, intellectual courage, and intellectual humility, to the processes through which knowledge is obtained. This approach seeks to address gaps left by traditional epistemological theories, particularly in light of challenges presented by Gettier cases.