Chapter 3: Epistemology

Epistemology (/??p?st?'m?l?d?i/ (

listen); from Ancient Greek ?p?st?µ? (epist?me) 'knowledge', plus -logy), as well as the philosophy of knowledge, is the philosophical discipline concerned with knowledge?.

Epistemology is a prominent area in philosophy, in addition to other important subfields such as ethics, logic, and metaphysics.

The philosophical examination of the nature of knowledge and the criteria necessary for a belief to qualify as knowledge, such as truth and justification.

Perception, reason, memory, and witness are examples of possible knowledge and justified belief sources.

The organization of a body of knowledge or justified belief, including whether all justified views must be drawn from fundamental justified beliefs or if justification needs merely a cohesive collection of ideas.

Philosophical skepticism, which examines the existence of knowing, and related issues, such as whether skepticism constitutes a danger to our claims of common knowledge and if it is feasible to disprove skeptical arguments.

In these and other conflicts, epistemology seeks to address such questions as "What do people know?", "What does it mean to claim that people know something?", "What makes justified views justifiable?", and "How do individuals know that they know?" What are the techniques, goals, and subject matter of epistemological inquiry? (within the field of social epistemology).

The word epistemology is derived from the ancient Greek episteme, meaning "information, understanding, skill, scientific knowledge", The term "epistemology" had its debut in 1847, according to a review published in New York's Eclectic Magazine:

The title of one of Fichte's most important books is Wissenschaftslehre, which, by comparison with technology... we translate as epistemology.

In 1854, Scottish philosopher James Frederick Ferrier was the first to use the term to define a philosophy in English. It was the first chapter in his Institutes of Metaphysics:

This branch of study is called Epistemology, which is the doctrine or theory of knowing, much as ontology is the science of being... It responds to the question "What is knowing and the known?" or, to put it more succinctly, "What is knowledge?"

In the article on epistemology for the Dictionary of Philosophy, Ledger Wood stated, "The breadth of epistemology may be determined by examining its connections to adjacent fields." The relationship between epistemology and adjacent fields was first explored in English by Ferrier in 1854, when he coined the word, and by Russell and others in 1912 and later years. Its German counterpart, Erkenntnistheorie, did not arise until the nineteenth century under neo-Kantianism. Peter Wagner defines the neo-Kantian scope of epistemology as the study of the circumstances that make knowledge conceivable in general, while also considering the special foundations of science: an a priori basis that, according to Kant, must be searched within the faculties of the knowing subject.

Luciano Floridi believes there was an epistemological "renaissance" between the two world wars. He characterizes it as "a bridge between early modern and current knowing theory." During this change, crucial perspectives that explain the breadth of epistemology as discussed in this article emerged.

Particularly significant are metaphysical or ontological perspectives, such as idealism vs realism, and new disciplines, such as cognitive science.

Plato contrasted, among Ancient Greek philosophers, between investigation into what individuals know and research into what exists, notably in the Republic, the Theaetetus, and the Meno.

René Descartes, Who is often regarded as the father of contemporary philosophy?, was often concerned with epistemological issues in his work.

During the succeeding Hellenistic era, philosophical schools with a stronger emphasis on epistemic concerns started to emerge, often in the form of philosophical skepticism.

In ancient India the Ajñana school of ancient Indian philosophy promoted skepticism.

Ajñana was a Srama?a movement and a major rival of early Buddhism, Jainism and the Ajivika school.

They believed that it was impossible to get knowledge of metaphysical nature or to determine the veracity of philosophical statements; even if knowledge were attainable, It was ineffective and detrimental to eternal salvation.

They concentrated in rebuttal without promoting their own positive theory.

After the ancient philosophical period but before to the modern philosophical era, a number of medieval philosophers engaged in lengthy discussions of epistemological issues. For their contributions to epistemology, Thomas Aquinas, John Duns Scotus, and William of Ockham stood out among the Middle Ages.

When attempting to comprehend the link between historical epistemology and modern epistemology, contemporary academics use a variety of distinct approaches. Should we suppose that the difficulties of epistemology are eternal and that reconstructing and evaluating Plato's or Hume's or Kant's reasoning is relevant to contemporary debates? This is one of the most disputed concerns.

Bertrand Russell famously brought attention to the distinction between propositional knowledge and knowledge by acquaintance.

Almost all epistemological issues include some aspect of knowing. In the broadest sense, "knowledge" is a familiarity, awareness, or comprehension of someone or something, which may include propositional knowledge, procedural knowledge, or object knowledge (acquaintance knowledge). Three unique meanings of "knowing" are often distinguished by philosophers: "knowing that" (knowing the truth of propositions), "knowing how" (understanding how to undertake specific acts), and "knowing by acquaintance" (directly perceiving an object, being familiar with it, or otherwise coming into contact with it). The theoretical interpretation and importance of these language concerns continue to be contested.

Bertrand Russell devoted considerable emphasis to the dichotomy between "knowledge by description" and "knowledge by acquaintance" in his work On Denoting and his subsequent book Problems of Philosophy. In The Concept of Mind, Gilbert Ryle is also recognized for drawing greater emphasis to the contrast between knowing how and knowing that. Michael Polanyi argues in Personal Knowledge for the epistemological significance of knowledge how and knowledge that; using the act of maintaining balance while riding a bicycle as an illustration, he suggests that theoretical knowledge of the physics involved in maintaining a state of balance cannot substitute for practical knowledge of how to ride, and that it is important to understand how both are established and grounded. This is precisely the stance of Ryle, who stated that failing to recognize the difference between "knowledge that" and "knowledge how" leads to an unending regress.

The contrast between what can be known a priori (independently of experience) and what can be known a posteriori is one of the most crucial in epistemology (through experience). The phrases derive from Aristotle's Organon's Analytic techniques and may be broadly described as follows::

A priori knowledge is information that exists apart from experience (that is, it is non-empirical, or arrived at before experience, usually by reason). It will thereafter be gained via any means other than experience.

A posteriori knowledge is acquired by experience (that is, it is empirical, or arrived at through experience).

In general, rationalist perspectives are those that stress the relevance of a priori knowledge. Generally, empiricist perspectives are characterized by their emphasis on a posteriori knowledge.

Belief is one of the key notions in epistemology. A person's attitude toward whatever they consider to be true constitutes their beliefs.

Truth is the quality or condition of being consistent with facts or reality.

According to the meaning of the word "justification" in epistemology, a belief is justified if there are solid reasons for believing it. Justification is, in a broad sense, the reason someone maintains a logically acceptable belief, assuming there is a reasonable reason for holding it. Perceptual experience (the evidence of the senses), reason, and authoritative witness are examples of possible sources of justification. Importantly, the justification of a belief does not ensure that the belief is accurate, since a person may be justified in creating views based on very persuasive evidence that was still deceptive.

Epistemological externalists and epistemological internalists are at the center of a key argument over the nature of justification. While epistemic externalism was first developed in an effort to solve the Gettier dilemma, it has since thrived as an alternate method of conceptualizing epistemic justification. Alvin Goldman is often credited with developing epistemic externalism, but various other philosophers have worked on the subject subsequently.

Externalists think that circumstances of justification might be "external," or external to the psychological situations of persons who acquire knowledge. For instance, according to an externalist approach to the Gettier issue, for a justified true belief to qualify as knowledge, there must be a connection or dependence between the belief and the state of the external world. This is often regarded to be a causal relationship. Such a cause, inasmuch as it is "outside" the mind, would qualify as an external, knowledge-producing situation. Conversely, internalists claim that all knowledge-producing circumstances...