THEORY OF

KNOWLEDGE
 What are the
scope and limits
Questions about of knowledge?
the nature of
knowledge:
How to acquire
knowledge?
Skepticism

THEORY OF
KNOWLEDGE Rationalism

Empiricism

Relativism

2
 — Jonathan Harrison’s thought
experiment.
THEORY OF — Brain-in-vat
KNOWLEDGE

Lawhead, p.173, 7th ed.

 JOHN POLLOCK’S “BRAIN IN A
VAT” THOUGHT EXPERIMENT

Pollock tells us that on a rainy night his friend Harry’s wife called him and told him that
six hooded armed men had broken in, made sure that he was the right person, put
him in an ambulance and drove away. When Harry’s wife Ann called the police, two
plain clothes officials arrived and told her to keep her mouth shut otherwise she
would never see her husband again. As Ann wrote down the number of ambulance,
Pollock was able to find out that Harry had been taken to a private clinic. After an
adventurous search he founds Harry, but a surgical team had removed the top of his
skull and had taken his brain out. The brain was placed in a stainless still bowl and
some tubes and wires connected to Harry’s “disembodied brain.”

• John Pollock, “Brain in a Vat” in Science Fiction and Philosophy From Time Travel to
Superintelligence, ed. Susan Schneider (Blackwell Publishing, Kindle Edition, 2009), pp.
17-19.
JOHN POLLOCK’S “BRAIN IN A
VAT” THOUGHT EXPERİMENT

• Pollock was himself caught and strapped to the operation

table. He was told that Harry was not dead and that Harry’s brain
had been removed from the body and kept alive with a new
surgical procedure developed by the best neuroscientists of the
world. The wires which were connected to Harry’s disembodied
brain also connected him to a computer. This powerful computer
provided input to the sensory cortex of the brain which was in the
vat. Through these inputs Harry had a “fictitious mental life”
which seemed to him as normal. He was not aware that he was
just a brain in a vat.

• John Pollock, “Brain in a Vat” in Science Fiction and Philosophy

From Time Travel to Superintelligence, ed. Susan Schneider
(Blackwell Publishing, Kindle Edition, 2009), pp. 17-19.
JOHN POLLOCK’S “BRAIN IN A
VAT” THOUGHT EXPERİMENT

• The scientists eased Pollock’s apprehension that he too would

go through the same procedure by telling him that there was
nothing to worry because they had already done this operation
three months ago. They then let him go with all the doubts in his
mind about whether he is a brain in vat or he is really going to his
office and for him there is nothing there to confirm him whether it
is the case or not.

• John Pollock, “Brain in a Vat” in Science Fiction and Philosophy

From Time Travel to Superintelligence, ed. Susan Schneider
(Blackwell Publishing, Kindle Edition, 2009), pp. 17-19.
• Science Fiction writer Greg Egan explores the
idea of minds without bodies or bodies with
minds that are supported by quantum
computers in his Schild’s Ladder.
 The questions raised in these thought
experiment concern
Brain in vat — the nature and possibility of knowledge
and truth
— the justification of our beliefs.
 • Everything that you know about what
exists outside your experience is
mediated by means of your
experiences.
• Is it important that we be able to justify
THEORY OF our beliefs?
KNOWLEDGE • What would be the problem with
having beliefs that we believe are true
but that we could not justify?
• Because you frequently found out that
your experiences can be wrong, how
can you be sure they are ever right?

Lawhead, p.51-2
 • Questions about the nature of
knowledge:
THEORY OF • What are the scope and limits
KNOWLEDGE of knowledge?
• How to acquire knowledge?
 Epistemology: the area of philosophy that
deals with questions concerning knowledge
and that considers various theories of
knowledge.
THEORY OF In Greek,
KNOWLEDGE Episteme means knowledge
Logos means rational discourse
So, epistemology means philosophy of
knowledge.

Lawhead, p.174, 7th ed.

 Types of Knowledge

Knowledge by acquaintance
• ‘I know the president of this university as
a personal friend.’

THEORY OF Competence knowledge

• ‘I know how to play the piano.’
KNOWLEDGE
Propositional knowledge
• ‘I know that Istanbul is in Turkey.’

• The object of knowledge is the truth of

some propositions or state of facts.
 THEORY OF
KNOWLEDGE

Truth
Knowledge

Justification

Belief
Certainty is necessary for there to be knowledge, if doubt is possible, then we do not have certainty.
 DEFINITION OF
KNOWLEDGE

A common and traditional definition

of knowledge is:
true justified belief.

Consider the following
scenarios. In each case,
decide why it would or
would not be correct to say
that “Ayşe knows that Lale’s
birthday is today.”
• Ayşe believes that Lale’s birthday is today.
• Actually, Lale’s birthday is next week.
• Ayşe has no idea about the date of Lale’s birthday.
• Lale’s birthday is today.
• Ayşe randomly picks a day from the calendar and it is April 6th.
• Depending on it, Ayşe decides that April 6th is Lale’s birthday.
• Indeed, April 6th is Lale’s birthday.
• Ayşe looks at Lale’s passport and notices that today is her
birthday.
• Ayşe has no reason to believe that the date on Lale’s passport is
inaccurate.
• Based on these considerations, Ayşe believes that today is Lale’s
birthday.
• It is true that today is Lale’s birthday.
Adapted from Lawhead, 7th ed. p.175
 Knowledge justified independently of, or prior to,
experience.

• What kinds of knowledge could be justified without

any appeal to experience?

• Definitions and logically necessary truths.

A priori • ‘All unicorns are one-horned creatures.’
• ‘All bachelors are unmarried men.’
knowledge • ‘Either my friend will visit me today or she won’t.’

• They do not give us any factual information about the

world.

Lawhead, 7th ed. p.176

 Find the missing angle ‘C’

A priori
knowledge

In a triangle, the three interior angles always

add to 180º.

Lawhead, 7th ed. p.176


A priori knowledge
We learn math from teachers.
Why mathematical claims a
priori?
which it can be shown to be
3+2=5
‘What makes something a
priori is not the means by
which it came to be first
known, but the means by
true or false. . . . A priori knowledge is thus
distinguished by its method
of proof, not by how we
acquire it’
Julian Baggini, 2011.The Philosophers Toolkit, Wiley-Blackwell
 Knowledge based on, or posterior to, experience.

‘Water freezes at 32 degrees Fahrenheit.’

A posteriori ‘Caterpillars become butterflies.’

knowledge
All previously observed polar bears have weighed
less than 1,500 pounds. Therefore, all polar bears
probably weigh less than 1,500 pounds.

Lawhead, p.54
 Analytic judgement is one that does not
add anything to what is included in the
concept.
‘subject’ (the thing the sentence about)
Analytic / ‘predicate’ (what is said about the thing the
sentence about)
Synthetic Predicates are
Distinction Snow is white.
already in the
subjects.

All bachelors are unmarried men.

Lawhead, p.54
 “All bachelors are unmarried.”
This statement does not tell us anything
about the world, but only the meaning of
Analytic / the words.
Synthetic Definition of bachelor : “A bachelor is an
Distinction unmarried male human being of
marriageable age.”

Falzon; Philosophy Goes to the Movies, pp. 39 - 40.

 Water boils at 100 degrees Celsius.

S P

Analytic / Predicate is not contained in the concept of

Synthetic subject.
Predicate adds something to the subject.
Distinction
Here, we are making a synthetic judgement.

Julian Baggini, 2011.The Philosophers Toolkit, Wiley-Blackwell

Are all a priori claims analytic?
 David Hume (1711 – 1776)

All the objects of human reason or inquiry may naturally be

divided into two kinds, . . . Relations of Ideas and Matters of
Facts. On the first kind are the sciences of Geometry, Algebra,
and Arithmetic; and in short, every affirmation, which is either
intuitively or demonstratively certain. . . . That three times five
is equal to the half of thirty, expresses a relation between
these numbers. . . .

David Hume, Enquiry Concerning Human Understanding, Section 4, (1 & 2).

 David Hume (1711 – 1776)
Matters of fact, which are the second objects of human reason, are not
ascertained in the same manner; nor is our evidence of their truth,
however great, of a like nature with the foregoing. The contrary of
every matter of fact is still possible; because it can never imply a
contradiction, and is conceived by the mind with the same facility and
distinctness, as if ever so comfortable to reality. That the sun will not
rise to-morrow is no less intelligible a proposition, and implies no more
contradiction, than the affirmation, that it will rise.

David Hume, Enquiry Concerning Human Understanding, Section 4, (1 & 2).

 Could reason alone can tell us about the
ultimate nature of reality?

Is there any a priori knowledge that does

give us knowledge about the real world?

Epistemological Is it possible to have knowledge at all?

Questions Does reason provide us with knowledge
of the world independently of
experience?

Does our knowledge represent reality as it

really is?

Lawhead, 5th ed. p.54-55

 Skepticism is the claim that we do not
have knowledge.

Is it possible to have knowledge at all? NO

Options
concerning Does reason provide us with knowledge
of the world independently of
KNOWLEDGE experience? Irrelevant

Does our knowledge represent reality as it

really is?
Irrelevant

Lawhead, 5th ed. p.54-55

 Rationalism claims that reason is the primary
source of our fundamental knowledge about
reality.
Reason can give us knowledge apart from
experience.

Is it possible to have knowledge at all?

Options
concerning Does reason provide us with knowledge of the
YES
world independently of experience?
KNOWLEDGE
Does our knowledge represent reality as it really
is? YES

YES

Lawhead, 5th ed. p.54-55

 Empiricism is the claim that sense experience
is the sole source of our knowledge about the
world.

Options Is it possible to have knowledge at all? YES

concerning
Does reason provide us with knowledge of the
KNOWLEDGE world independently of experience?
NO
Does our knowledge represent reality as it
really is?
YES

Lawhead, 5th ed. p.54-55

 Constructivism is the claim that knowledge is
neither already in the mind nor passively received
from experience, but that the mind constructs
knowledge out of the materials of experience.
(Kantian position)

Is it possible to have knowledge at all?

Options
concerning Does reason provide us with knowledge of the
world independently of experience? YES
KNOWLEDGE
Does our knowledge represent reality as it really
is? YES

NO

Lawhead, 5th ed. p.54-55

 Epistemological relativism is the claim that
there is no universal objective knowledge of
reality because all knowledge is relative to
either to individual or his or her culture.
Options
concerning Is it possible to have knowledge at all? YES
KNOWLEDGE
Does reason provide us with knowledge of the
world independently of experience? NO

Does our knowledge represent reality as it

really is? NO

Lawhead, 5th ed. p.54-55

Table 3.1: Three Epistemological Questions and Five Positions on Them

Epistemological Is knowledge Does reason provide us with Does our

positions possible? knowledge of the world knowledge
independently of experience? represent reality as
it really is?

Skepticism No Not applicable Not applicable

Rationalism Yes Yes Yes

Empiricism Yes No Yes

Constructivism (Kant) Yes Yes No

Relativism Yes No No

Lawhead, p. 179, 7th edition

 Skepticism is the claim that we do not
have knowledge.

Is it possible to have knowledge at all? NO

Options
concerning Does reason provide us with knowledge
of the world independently of
KNOWLEDGE experience? Irrelevant

Does our knowledge represent reality as it

really is?
Irrelevant

Lawhead, 5th ed. p.54-55

 EXERCISE
SKEPTICISM &
KNOWLEDGE
 There is no fail-safe
method for determining
when people’s beliefs are
true or false
Skepticism

Nothing is beyond doubt

 SKEPTICISM

How do we know
How do we know
that our sense
that right now we
experience ever
are not dreaming?
reveals reality to us?

Lawhead, pp . 176-77, 6th edition

What do you see?
A young woman?
An old woman?
Both?

Source:
http://www.aber.ac.uk/media/Modules/MC10220/visper06.html
Which central/white circle is bigger?
 A. Which line is longer?

Source: http://testplease.com/?tag=visual-perception
 A. Which line is longer? B. Which arch is bigger?

C. Which red line is longer?

Source: http://testplease.com/?tag=visual-perception
 Can you find a way to doubt the truth
of each of the following statements?
• Lemons are yellow.
• I am (your age) years old.
• American astronauts have walked on the
Skeptical Doubt moon.
• I am now reading a slide.
• 2+3 = 5
• This screen has four edges.
• I am now doubting.
• I exist.
 1. We can find reasons for doubting any one of
our beliefs.
2. It follows that we can doubt all our beliefs.
3. If we can doubt all our beliefs, then
Generic we cannot be certain of any of them.
Skeptical 4. If we do not have certainty about any of our
beliefs, then
Argument
we do not have knowledge.
5. Therefore, we do not have knowledge.
 René Descartes
(1596 – 1650)
Descartes thinks that his mission in life was to develop a new
philosophy based on mathematical reasoning, that would
provide absolute certainty and serve as the foundation of all the
other sciences.

• Descartes passion was to find certainty.

• He used skeptical doubt as a test to decide which beliefs were
absolutely certain.
• His strategy could be called methodological skepticism

Lawhead, p. 181- 82, 6th edition

 René Descartes
(1596 – 1650)

According to Descartes, if he could think of any

possibility that a belief of his could be mistaken,
no matter how impossible this basis of doubt
was, then he would suspend judgement
concerning that belief.

Lawhead, p. 182, 6th edition

 René Descartes
(1596 – 1650)
‘Once the foundations of a building are undermined,
anything built on them collapses of its own accord;
so I will go straight for the basic principles on which
all my former beliefs rested.’
Mediations on First Philosophy

Firstly, Descartes examined his general sense

experiences. They can deceive us. Our senses
cannot provide an indubitable base on which to
build our knowledge.
Lawhead, p. 182, 6th edition
 René Descartes
(1596 – 1650)
• In Mediations on First Philosophy, Descartes
• Questions our reliance on sense experience
for our knowledge of the world

• Challenges our confidence that what we take

to be knowledge is knowledge.

• Descartes, using some skeptical arguments,

tries to show that most of the things that we
think we know, even the most obvious ones,
depending on our senses (sense experiences)
can be questioned.
Falzon; Philosophy Goes to the Movies, p.26
René Descartes
(1596 – 1650)
Descartes, points out the possibility that
our sense experience might radically
mislead us about the world.

• He raises doubt about what experience

tells us even about things that are right
before us.

Falzon; Philosophy Goes to the Movies, p.26

THE DREAM ARGUMENT

Is it possible to determine whether we are dreaming or not?

Descartes states that although there are dreams with strange

associations, which are ‘dreamlike’, there are also dreams that are
akin to reality, which are hard to distinguish from reality.

Here is Descartes’ thought experiment: He is sitting by the fire, in

his dressing gown, holding a piece of paper in his hand.

How does he know that he is sitting by the fire, writing, not in fact
asleep, in bed, dreaming that he is sitting by the fire, writing?

Falzon; Philosophy Goes to the Movies, p.26

 “As I consider these matters more carefully, I see
so plainly that there are no definitive signs by
which to distinguish being awake from being
asleep.”
Mediations on First Philosophy, p.14.

THE DREAM
ARGUMENT This is somewhat proposing the possibility that
everything we currently experience might be an
illusion.

Any test that tests our being in the real world

could itself be part of an illusion, a virtual reality,
or a dream.

Falzon; Philosophy Goes to the Movies, pp.26 – 29.

 Another thought experiment Descartes presents is
the possibility that ‘some malicious demon of the
utmost power and cunning has employed all his
energies in order to deceive him.’
THE EVIL
DEMON ‘I shall think that the sky, the air, the earth, colours,
shapes, sounds and all external things are merely the
ARGUMENT delusions of dreams which he has devised to ensnare
my judgement. I shall consider myself as not having
hands or eyes, or flesh, or blood or senses, but as
falsely believing that I have all these things.’
Mediations on First Philosophy

Falzon; Philosophy Goes to the Movies, p. 29.

 THE EVIL DEMON ARGUMENT
Descartes did not necessarily believe that
such an evil demon exists but merely that its
existence is logically possible.

Everything we experience;
• might be an illusion
• generated within us by the evil demon
We cannot be sure,
• what the world is like
• whether there is a word outside us at all
• of basic mathematical truths (2 + 2 = 4)
Source: By Berlin, Irving - Library of Congress[1], Public Domain,
https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?curid=4821466 Falzon; Philosophy Goes to the Movies, pp. 30 - 34.
 THE EVIL DEMON
ARGUMENT

We could be so profoundly manipulated that

everything we have ever taken to be reality
could be illusory.

Descartes challenges our confidence about

what we think we know.

Source: By Berlin, Irving - Library of Congress[1], Public Domain,

https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?curid=4821466 Falzon; Philosophy Goes to the Movies, pp. 30 - 34.
‘I think, therefore I am.’
(Cogito ergo sum.)

For Descartes, although we can doubt

everything our senses tell us, our reason
tells us that there is one thing we cannot
doubt, that is our own existence.
I have to exist in order to be deceived.

Falzon; Philosophy Goes to the Movies, pp. 37 -38.