April, 16, 2010

1. April, 16, 2010 EPISTEMOLOGY

2. EPISTEMOLOGY Historically As a discourse / issues on knowledge As an independent study / branch of knowledge Since Greek antiquity Arose since 17 C / 18 C On the source or tool of knowledge Some examples issues: On the certitude in human knowledge On the measure (mizan) of knowledge

3. Some epistemological issues On the source or tool of knowledge Since Greek antiquity Concerning the instrument of knowledge Heraclites (500 BC) Parmenides (early 50 C. BC) Emphasized on Sensorial perception Emphasized on mere rationality Plato (428BC - 347 BC ) We could not have knowledge from sensible world Aristotle (382 B.C. - 322 B.C) Both Rationality and Sensory perception are valuable RATIONALISM After this ages, the western philosophers stand separately and OPPOSITIONALLY in one of both sides, EMPIRICISM Such as EPICUREAN (the followers of Epicurus [3441-247 BC]) : Only sense is valuable, there is no value for rationality as the tool of knowledge

4. Some epistemological issues ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? On the problem of certitude in human knowledge Since Greek antiquity Problem of Sophism Reject any certainty in knowledge Questioning (C 5 BC) Is it possible that we have any knowledge at the level of certitude? one of the most difficult subject in epistemology Human is the measure of all thing Protaghorias Human as parameter of knowledge Relativism Established skepticism Phoron

5. Some epistemological issues On the measure (mizan) of knowledge Since Greek antiquity Foundationlism This theory holds that beliefs are justified (known, etc.) based on basic or foundationally beliefs, that is beliefs that give justificatory support to other beliefs. So this basic beliefs must be self-evident(badihi, self-justifying), or not justified by other beliefs (non-badihi, not an inferential justification). In this theory, a belief is justified only if it is justified by a basic belief or beliefs, or it is justified by a chain of beliefs that is supported by a basic belief or beliefs, and on which all the others are ultimately based. The proof can be traced back to Aristotle

6. EPISTEMOLOGY The nature, essence, or reality of knowledge The base of knowledge The limit of knowledge The justifiability of knowledge explanation Definition A philosophical knowledge which analyzes: Ref. to : Paul Edward Ref. to : Paul Edward, & Moser (Theory of Knowledge)

7. 1 I know driving, swimming, etc. Knowing “how to” means has skill to do something Knowledge of Skill I know Jakarta, the book, etc 2 Is “Jakarta” a knowledge? No it is object of knowledge Knowledge by acquaintance Knowledge by acquaintance I know that A, B, C are true 3 You recognize that one’s proposition is true Propositional Knowledge Analysis of knowledge Western contemporary philosopher (analytic philosopher) What is knowledge ? What is “to know” ? Analytic division of the word “knowing” Three meaning of “knowing”

8. Analytic philosopher’s division of the word “knowing” Mixing between The usage of the word “knowing” The philosophical meaning of “knowing”

9. Propositional Knowledge Epistemology in western contemporary philosophy Epistemology includes Before 20 C proposition concept Analytic philosophers focus themselves on After 20 C Propositional meaning of knowledge

10. Analytic philosophers focus themselves on ? ? ? ? After 20 C Propositional meaning of knowledge questioning The aim of epistemology Correspondence To come to the fact To grasp the reality Finding the true or false

11. Correspondence to reality Real “PEN” Attributes : Blue color Solid material “PEN” Long in size Etc.. Real “PEN” Has many attributes or predicates Is “PEN”in itself an existence? “PEN is blue, solid.., bla,,,bla…” Object of knowledge tashdiq (pure) “PEN” Not Object of knowledge tashawwur

12. ? DOUBT The Existence of “I”

13. Religious doctrines, ethical judgements; mathematical studies, etc. Epistemology Three approaches General study (Broad sense) 1. Classical Approach : Socrates, Plato, Aristotle 2. Modern Approach : Start from Descartes 3. Contemporary Approach . Epistemological discourse Concerning different particular fields, such as: Specific study (Limited sense) 1

14. Epistemology in General Main subject The Nature and Scope of knowledge Some of main questions • What is knowledge? • How is knowledge acquired? • What do people know? • How do we know that we know ? • What is true knowledge How can we have a true knowledge? • What is the criteria of true knowledge? • How do we know that our knowledge is true ore false ? Classical, Modern, and Contemporary 3 Approaches 2

15. Epistemology in General Classical, Modern, and Contemporary 3 Approaches Classical Approach Some of the figures : Socrates (469 BC–399 BC ), Plato, Aristotle ? ? How do we know the reality? How can our mind come at the reality? Main questions • What is the criteria of true knowledge? • What is the value of knowledge? ? ? It does not put “Reality” in question : The Reality of Existence & the Reality of the knower • is taken for granted as a foundation or basic belief • is regarded as self-evident or self-justified (badihi) Hence, the epistemological building in classical approach is grounded on basic belief 3 At least, the reality, the knower himself, his emotion, sense,

16. Modern Approach Main figure : Descartes (1596 – 1650 ) • Modern approach in epistemology is begun from the since from the Rationalism of Rene Descartes. • Cartesian rationalism is the result of his methodical skepticism is aimed at eliminating all belief which it is possible to doubt, thus leaving us with indubitable beliefs, from which further knowledge is derived. • Descartes held that a knowing subject can doubt on all of his knowledge. • But how can he doubt on his doubt? • As the consequence, how can one who doubts doubt himself as real? Our doubt The ground object of belief 4

17. Modern Approach ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? From DOUBT to CERTAINTY then build further KNOWLEDGE ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? “Cogito, ergo sum” The Cartesian Epistemological Steps Cogito ergo sum What is the criteria of indubitable knowledge? It must be 1. CLEAR & 2. DISTINCT 5

18. Modern Approach What is the criteria of indubitable knowledge? It must be 1. CLEAR & 2. DISTINCT (clarity contrasts with obscurity) distinctness contrasts with confusion Innate idea Such as ideas in : • mathematics (e.g., number, line, triangle) • logic (e.g., contradiction, necessity), • metaphysics (e.g., identity, substance, causality). • even our sensory ideas, of colors, sounds, tastes, and the like, whosecontent draws from the mind itself. • Including GOD, (Since source of perfect idea in one’s imperfect mind, must not come from the imperfect but Perfect itself, that is God.) ideas whose content derives solely from the nature of the mind itself. GOD, is an idea But This is a conceptual God, That we cannot worship to But the idea is the primary, so He is real 6

19. Modern Approach Contemporary Approach • Starts from methodical skepticism • The question: What is indubitable knowledge? • Main belief must be clear and distinct • Start from defining knowledge • The question is What is knowledge ? • A knowledge must have 3 epistemic attributes: • Belief • Justified • True The Epistemological Steps of Contemporary approach DEFINITION of KNOWLEDGE ANALYSIS of the definition FINDING THE 3 ATTRIBUTES, 1 2 Knowledge = (must be) JUSTIFIED TRUE BELIEF (JTB) 3 7

20. Classical Modern Based on a preceding indubitable basic belief (the existence of reality) assumed taken for granted Contemporary From skeptic (methodical) to ultimate indubitable certainty from analysis to knowledge Influenced by Western acute Skepticism Under Analytic approach (analytic Philosophy) spell Certainty Doubt 100% human knowledge can be true (objectively grasp reality as it is) Confident 50% - 50 % Between +/-80% 8

21. SCEPTICISM Global skepticism Local skepticism That one cannot possess knowledge in some particular domain. ( absolute skepticism / universal skepticism) that one cannot know anything at all. Two common Arguments The argument from ASLEEP The argument from ERROR 9

22. GLOBAL Skepticism Argument from ERROR Two premises Premise 1 Premise 2 Universalizability It is adopted from a moral thesis A situation must be equally applicable to every relevantly identical situation We mistaken in many situations in which we think we have knowledge claims. There are also situations we have knowledge claims that we don't know we are not mistaken about. CONCLUSION All human knowledge can be false, we cannot know whether or not we are mistaken, Human has no knowledge (justified true believe) 10

23. GLOBAL Skepticism Argument from ASLEEP When we sleep, and in a middle of dreaming we are sure and believe that the situation, and whatever happen in dreaming, are real as if it is not a dream . . . until we wake up… then we realize that all the prior happenings are a mere dream But . . . We in dreaming situation we feel the world of dream as real THE SAME FEELING OF REAL of the real world when we wake up Then . . . What if that we think a dream is turn out to be real And what we guess as real, now, is turn out to be a dream? DREAM PARADOX What if our “dreaming” after we have awaken is turn out to our real awakening, and our awakening is turn out to be our dreaming? 11

24. Ontological, Epistemological, Hermeneutical 3 Levels Skepticism Three Levels of Skepticism 1. There is no reality Ontological Skepticism 2. Even if there is a reality, we are not able to make sure that it is reality Epistemological Skepticism 3. Suppose there is reality or thing which is real, and we sure on the reality, we still have no words to express what our mind know about the reality Hermeneutical Skepticism

25. Task : On Descartes’ Methodical Skepticism There are more or less than 12 steps How Descartes went to his skepticism Until he got certainty ….. Write a paper on this by referring to Descartes’ book Discourse on Method ! The paper must be submitted next week !