Human being are searching for knowledge
and have a doctrine of knowledge is “epistemology”. How we gain knowledge? An
empiricist, John Locke said that our minds are in state of Tabula Rasa, a blank
slate when we were born. By experience things through our senses, we will
fulfill our empty of all ideas and concepts. After that, we will have more
complex concepts by grouping simple concepts together. In contract, Descartes
said that some concepts can be gained without experience such as mathematics.
By harmony, Immanuel Kant, a great German Philosopher, raised out his own
theory by arguing that we are all born with certain innate concepts. We cannot
experience the world without them. There is just an over view to see the
difference in the journey to gain knowledge. In this journey, human try to find
the value of knowledge in comparison with true belief by raised out the
question “why is knowledge better than true belief?” This essay will try to
answer this question by (1) definition of technical terms, (2) comparison
between knowledge and true belief, (3) some values of knowledge.
First, what is true belief? It is a belief
was correct in a reality. For example, “it is raining” is a belief in our
thinking and it is raining outside of a room when we see by our eyes. It is
just simple as we take out the quotation marks by reality. In another word,
thinking of a person or proposition is in case. From this, can people accept it
as a definition of knowledge? The answer is in the “beginning with Plato,
epistemologists have rejected this definition.”[1] By
the time, they tried to find the right definition and accepted that knowledge
is justified true belief (JTB). In
1963, Edmund Gettier raised a question “is justified true belief knowledge?” by
offering “two convincing counterexamples to the justified true belief account
of knowledge.”[2]
He challenged epistemologists to find out other definition such as true belief
plus X. What is X? It is still in a process to the best definition. In this
writing, I just use the word knowledge as true belief plus X. In detail, there
are three kinds of knowledge: “acquaintance knowledge, which knowing a place,
person, or thing; ability knowledge, which knowing how to do something; and
propositional knowledge, which knowing that a proposition is true.”[3]
Second, what is difference between
knowledge and true belief? At the beginning, there is a comparison between true
and false belief. This is the benefit of them. It is easy to realize that a
true belief is better than a false belief. For example, “it is raining” is true
that it is raining. The benefit that you have to wear raincoat or you will stay
at home. If it is false, you will confuse to decide what to do. It same to me
that true belief is “just as useful as knowledge”[4].
However, in Plato’s Meno, I recognize that you think you know such as true
belief is different with you know as knowledge. For instance, my brothers in
community will think that they know the way to Saint Joseph Scholasticate by my
knowledge as their true belief. However, they will never know the way as their
knowledge if they have never gone to it. What will happen if there is some
problem in the street when they go in the first time? It is to answer that they
will contact me who know the way not only a true belief but also knowledge. According
to Plato, knowledge is more valuable than true belief because true belief
become a piece of knowledge when they are anchored.[5] That
is one of differences between them. In my opinion, I find out the difference
between true belief and knowledge when I look at the result of them, especially
in science. We all believed that the sun orbits the earth in Pre-Copernican
world-view as true belief. After that, we know that the sun is the center of Solar
System as a part of knowledge. It is seem to know that we had knowledge after
true belief by new science evidence. In this example, I want to say that the
true belief is less than knowledge. In addition, there are many global issues
such as environmental pollution, war, human right because we just have true
belief not knowledge. We believed in new science as true belief and we destroy
the world to serve ourselves more than contact with it. For example, we build
many industry parks and then we face with a problem of global warming. There is
a photo of “new evolution” that human come from ocean and now we throw the
rabid to it as a circle. It same to me that human just have a part of knowledge
as a true belief more than knowledge in itself. Therefore, I realize that what
we have as knowledge just thinking or some part of knowledge which is correct
in a particular space and time.
Finally, there is some value of knowledge
for it better than true belief. Aristotle said, “All men by nature desire to
know”[6] In
my opinion, it means that human nature cannot accept some simple correct
thinking such as true belief. In another word, all people desire to have
knowledge with understanding because “knowledge is so much more highly valued
than true belief.”[7]
For example, someone desire to be excellence, he or she must have knowledge of
excellence to guide his or her actions. If they only have true belief, their
action will be sometime right, be wrong in another time.[8] In
addition, human being is “a human rational agent – it means to act in the world
to achieve goals or ends.”[9]
Even thought true belief can help us to do that, but we cannot get the final
ends just by it only. Moreover, Linda Zagzebski claimed that knowledge is one
of most important key to link the word and ourselves.[10]
She gave an example that love draws us out of ourselves and opens us to the
others. What will happen if we just live in our “shells” with no love? We will
follow solipsism, which is “an extreme form of subjective idealism that denies
that the human mind has any valid ground for believing in the existence of
anything but itself.”[11] It
cannot happen because human nature is social being and human being is not an
island. If we accept with Linda Zagzebski, we also answer to the skeptics “who
claims that knowledge is not possible” that “we have knowledge”. Furthermore, by
Nozick’s Experience Machine[12],
I know that to keep in touch with the world is very important. By the knowledge
of reality, we can contact with the real world and we will no more in the
machine as hedonism. We do not know what happiness really is, however it cannot
be pleasure only. People can live in pleasure with true belief; however, they
cannot seek the happiness without the knowledge because we are human who act,
being, and know reality. Because pleasure just happen in a short time and
cannot be always like happiness. For example, the man actor in the fiction film
Matrix was find out what is the reality after a time living in matrix, a
machine world. Furthermore, Professor Terry Walsh said, “We care about
knowledge because we care our lives”[13]
As human nature, we care about not only our lives but also lives of people who
matter to us. How can we take of others and us without the knowledge? Can a
mother take care her child’s health and education them by the truth belief
only? Therefore, human need to have knowledge to live or to care as a human
being by its value. Human nature is not only care the truth because its value
in health and education but also care about the truth of other to love them.
In conclusion, there are some reason for
knowledge is better than true belief that the desire to know, link between the
world and ourselves, ultimate happiness, and care about our lives. Those
reasons give us an invitation to enter the journey seeking for knowledge. It is
a sentence in the New Testament that “the truth will make you free” (Jn 8, 32).
What is the truth? Although Kant claim that God belong to the world of “things
in itself”, I believe God is the center of all things. He is a center of circle
as One, cover by a equilateral triangle with three vertices is Truth, Good, and
Beauty. He is same level with all things, but the center of all things and
everything in reference to Him. I can receive all value of knowledge from God.
[1] Professor Terry Walsh.
SJ, PowerPoint: Contemporary Epistemology
I, slide 16.
[2] Gibbs., PowerPoint: Epistemology V, slide 5.
[3] Gibbs.,
PowerPoint: Contemporary Epistemology I,
slide 12.
[4] Plato, Meno, 97b.
[5] Ibid., 97e.
[6]Aristotle, Metaphysics, http://classics.mit.edu/Aristotle/metaphysics.1.i.html
[7] Plato, Meno, 97d.
[8] Ibid., 97d.
[9] Professor Terry Walsh.
SJ, PowerPoint: Epistemology II, slide
4.
[10] Ibid., slide 8 (Linda Zagzebski, On
Epistemology (Wadsworth, 2009)
[11] Group
4, PowerPoint: Value of knowledge, slide 4.
[12] Professor
Terry Walsh. SJ, Op. cit.,
slide 10
[13] Ibid., slide 12
No comments:
Post a Comment