Discussion in Epistemology

Ang assignment nyo basically is to find the definition ng knowledge.

Magsimula ka sa introduction mo na Knowledge is always a relationship between human subject

and a portion of reality. who thinks, who perceives, who understands, and a portion of reality.
that knowledge could be direct or indirect that relationship can be direct or indirect.

1. Knowledge the direct relationship is that the knowledge of things which is known the
knowledge of acquaintance.
2. The indirect relationship is knowledge about thing.

Knowledge by acquaintance, example you knowing somebody else in a direct and personal way,
a kind of close relationship with another person or things or my knowledge about my own mental
states.

Knowledge by proposition is basically a kind of knowledge which is passed on to you through

your studies, this is a body of knowledge so because reality in itself is the structure, is a
proposition. What does the word proposition mean? Proposition basically refers to a kind of
statement about something. Every reality is describe by a proposition, by statement. Because we
are all linguistic human being, we use language, and the moment we experience reality, we use
words, we use subject, nouns,verbs, description adjectives, adverbs to describe our experience
with reality, that is the beauty of language, that’s why reality is structured like a proposition. Ang
propositional knowledge is a form which it is communicated about something. It is can be The
principal form in which reality becomes understandable to the human mind so that is
propositional knowledge.

Page 93…

So far we have seen that knowledge is a relation between a conscious subject and some portion
of reality. So that’s the conclusion. It is usually understood to be mediated through true
proposition and the majority of epistemological attention has been devoted to the subject side of
grad relation. In the state of knowledge the knower who is known the human subject is related to
a true proposition, so what does that mean, so the state of knowing of the human subject, the
human subject takes the proposition to be true, not unless it is provenal wise. This relation is
standardly called the state of belief. I the human subject I consider the proposition handed over
to me as true and this is I believe in that.

Pero yung sinasabi nila na that is the state of belief this can be disputed, pupwede daw iton
icriticize, pwedeng iprove as wrong because knowledge as true belief must have another
component to it, something else.

Page 104…

Ang title nung article is the object of knowledge and the component of knowledge. Dito
ipineresent ng author ang conclusion ng bawat section. Lets try to read that. Ang goal natin sabi
niya is to understand how to define knowledge and find the components of knowledge. Yung
section nay un is basically showing kung ano yung ipinaliwang nya sa past three sections. The
first section he arrived at the conclusion… I gave a rough… to the most noble goods.

Ang section one ay ipinapakita niya na yung desire natin na magkaroon ng pangunawa at
magkaroon ng tinatawag nating ah definition of knowledge ay hindi sapat na good lamang,
beautiful… because the absence of good, the absence of being kind is not necessarily to be
blamed kaya para sa kanya yuung knowledge as believing at true proposition as also lead to what
we called the noble goods. Pinakanoble na aim, noble na goal para sa pang unawa mo, how will
you define knowledge itself. Kasi halimbawa may mga tao na hindi naman kasi pareparehong
intelligent pero hindi mo naman sila sinisisi kung bakit sila ay hindi matalino. Kase nga may
absence, may mga tao na hindi tuwid mag-isip pero hindi mo sila sinisisi. Ibig bang sabihin nun
kapag ganun ang pang-unawa ko I can define knowledge as on the absence of something
good?...Or it should lead to something which is that noble, the most noble goods. Na kahit wala
ang mga peculiarities na iyon, yung mga examples na iyon, mga qualities na iyon you can speak
knowledge as such. Yaan ang pinaka, bakit sya sinasabi na ano the sense… human abilities… so
hindi sapat iyon kinakailangan na ang inyong definition ng knowledge ay nag iincompass the
most noble of all goods.

Section 2… Inano nya ang mga different focuses and methods of defining knowledge. The
desiderata, the desire to define knowledge…what are the focuses and methods used by him to
define knowledge. sHe tried to propose that she try to satisfy as many of them as possible. sHe
will not try to satisfy the common purpose of eliminating all normative concepts from the
definition. Lets go back to what we call the most noble goods. In itself knowledge was have a
normative value. Ano ba ang ibig sabihin ng normative. It comes from the word norm,
standard, normative ano ang standard na iyan,,, according to kay Arristotle the highest
good is virtue. that kind of virtue to arrive at something which is a moral dimension
because if a human subject aspires to understand and aspires to define knowledge that act
has a normative component, it has a moral dimension na hindi mo pupwedeng tanggalin,
that’s why at the end of the article, the author settles with the theory of knowledge based
on virtue. So sa section 2 ipineresent niya that knowledge, the concept of knowledge it always
has a moral dimension, ethical dimension. It is a theoretical advantage if it can be related to
central concepts in ethics since ethicists already have already have proposed theoretical
structures in which these concepts have been analyzed. So that’s section 2

In section 3,,, page 105…

We look at the moral of gettier example, nauunawaan nyo ba yung mga example ni gettier, about
sa normative components of knowledge, yung sinasabi niya kay gettier, Sa page 99. Sa section 3
na ito the author looked at the moral of gettier examples on concluded that the normative
component of knowledge, the component that makes knowledge good must entail the truth. So,
the success in reaching the truth must be an intrinsic part of the sense in which each instance of
knowledge is good.

For this act of understanding knowledge or defining knowledge it should not only be aspiring for
something which is the most noble good but should intrinsically, the meaning of the term
intrinsic, it longs naturally good, it is the desire to find the truth, so yung mga examples mga
counter examples na ginagawa, halimbawa..si Dr. Jones ay may pasyente base sa kaniyang result
ng blood test other laboratories test niya ng kaniyang xray, base sa evidence na iyan si dr. Jones
will say ok ito yung condition mo ito yung diagnosis mo, he believes in that pero papaano pero
kung si Mr. smith na patient ay mayroong palang ibang sakit na hindi pa nakikita, pupwede mo
bang sabihinna yung diagnosis ni Mr. jones ay mali, hindi kasi ibinase nya lang yung kaniyang
diagnosis doon sa Nakita niyang evidence pinaniniwalaan niyang tama iyon pero may isa pang
virus na hindi nila nakikita ibig bang sabihin nun ay mali ang kaniyang ginawa, hindi mo
masasabi kase nakabase iyon sa kaniyang evidence, so yun ang mga gettier examples na
ipinapaliwanag niya

Kapag dinagdagan ko ng isang bagay hindi ko pa rin masasabi na mali totally nagkaroon lamang
ng absence of knowledge kasi nga hindi pa nadediscover ang isang bagay na iyon. O kaya ang
isang judge na nagbigay ng hustisya sa isang tao na hindi naman pala siya ang pumatay pero
ibinase lang ng judge ang kaniyang judgement sa mga evidences na ipineresent sa kanya, di ba
may mga nangyayari dahil sa dna test naaacquit siya dahil may mga dna test na ginagamit
ngayon sa court. Yan yung mga examples na sinasabi niya na nangyayari yang mga iyan pero ito
ba ay sapat para sabihin natin na yes it is true condition analysis, yung true condition analysis
niya, pero hindi sapat iyon, kinakailangan nating malaman pa rin yung ating kagustuhan na
makaarrive sa katotohanan so the truth component should be intrinsically included in the act of
defining knowledge and that is what could you find in section 3, halimbawa fake news,
maraming nagsasabi ngayon sa social media ng ibat ibang statements, ibat ibang proposition,
possible na Mabuti ang kanilang intention pero kung hindi mo pagsusumikapan na malaman ang
katotohanan sa kabila ng mga ito hindi mo rin masasabi na nadefine mo ang iyong knowledge, di
ba palaging kapos, palaging kapos ang iyong attempt, kaya pinagsisikapan niya ngayong gawin
papaano ko ba masasabi na buo ang aking paraan ng pagdedefine ng knowledge

Ang sabi niya getting of truth is not by chance or luck, naaalala nyo yung words ni Aristotle,
hindi pupwedeng nakaswerte lang ako, hindi pupwedeng ako ay nakadelehensya lang,
kinakailangan ang aking desire to define what knowledge is ay hindi by chance kundi it is a
process of rigorous thinking, a rigorous examination of my relationship to the portion of reality
because ultimately that reality has been changed through the moral virtues that I acquire which is
always aspiring for something which is good. And that goodness, that praiseworthiness should
always intrinsically include the desire to find the truth. So meron siyang sinasabi sa page 100
about knowledge as justified true belief, but true belief is not by chance or lack, it is based on
something which is concrete on page 102, what are the components of knowledge, so inilagay
nya dito kung ano ang mga components, knowledge as justified true belief anong ibig sabihin
nun it should not be adhoc, situation, ano ang ibig sabihin niyan, na ang knowledge as justified
belief is not adhoc, that knowledge as justified true belief is a common criteria for good
definition it not be adhoc. It should not be negative…that’s the meaning of adhoc.. a justified
true belief ay hindi adhoc, knowledge is good true belief and knowledge is nonaccidentally true
belief, those are the component of knowledge the author presented in the article. We can find that
in page 102. The prevailing method of defining knowledge as true belief plus something else
which is the good, which is the virtous.

We go on the page 105,,, virtue theory of ethics which is the act of intellectual virtue, sa section
na ito.. the definition… believing as well as acting… believing and acting when you believe that
something is true you act on it. May mga situation na hindi lahat ng taong knowledgeable are
acting virtuously in same circumstances, look at the politicians they might know that something
is good and truthfull but when they arw confronted by constituents who ask from them other
things and if they want to hold on their power, posibleng hindi sila mag- act virtuously and
truthfully. The definition of knowledge must make success in reaching the truth an intrinsic
aspect of that which makes knowledge good. Itong section na ito ay basically Aristotelian in
component…the concept of good the concept of virtue which is intellectual virtue, moral virtue,
ang focus nya dito ay ang intellectual virtue pero ang sinasabi nya ay hindi mo maseseparate
ang moral virtue sa intellectual virtue, they should go together, intrinsically, because if you
want to have a good life and virtous life it all stands with having intellectual virtue that
aspirations for something good, something true, that is not exclude but include all the
substantial component of existence. Anong ibig sabihin niyan, bilang isang tao ang
intellectual virtue natin is the aspiration to know what is true because what is true is always
noble, it is always good, we always aspire for something which is good, we do not aspire for
something which is not good, so when we do that, we develop at the same time the moral virtue
of holding on to that goodness because that goodness brings something liberating to myself as a
human being, to the other people as my neighbors, to the whole world as my environment, a
place where I go exist with others, so that things is basically the summary of the virtue. That in
itself the desire to define knowledge has to include intellectual virtue and moral virtue, that’s
why she try to integrate the concept of knowledge into the ethical theory.

Page 104, on the top of the paper, knowledge … intrinsically related. Do not forget the word
intrinsic ang ibig sabihin nito ay hindi mo magagawa ang isang bagay kung wala ang isang
bagay, magkakabit sila, essentially , fundamentally magkakabit sila in essence, in nature, in
substance, and in form, kinakailangan magkakabit sila
Sa section for makikita natin ang mga summary o recapitulation ng knowledge sa kung anong
sinasabi niya sa first three sections, dito nya din diniscuss ang he connects knowledge to virtue.

Virtue has two components, the motivational component and the component of success. Sa
section na ito makkita natin kung ano talaga ang gusto niyang gawin to define knowledge by
basing it on ethics. So in reality ang author na ito ay nagsasabi na ang kaniyang desire to define
knowledge and contribute to daily activity of defining knowledge is to face it by virtue which is
highly influence by Aristotle in his Nechomachean ethics. The good, the beautiful, the virtous, a
knowledgeable person possesses those virtues hindi sapat na ikaw ay mag aspire dapat
napaghirapan mo sa iyong activity as a human subject to arrive at search something that is true
because that truth involves a component of goodness, of beauty, and praiseworthiness. So yan
yung components ng knowledge…