Epistemology: Knowledge-First Approach to Justification and Truth - Essay Sample

Introduction

Modern philosophers have accepted the claim that it is essential to limit what we claim to know, as the concept of knowledge cannot be categorized into a set of other theories, but can only be termed as sui generis (Kadir). Therefore, knowledge will require justification, truth, and a belief which calls for a whole new approach called knowledge-first epistemology. According to Hume, humans are stuck between skepticism and natural views. But when they realize how inaccurate inherent assumptions are, they turn back to the path of uncertainty. Similar sentiments are echoed by Kant who categorizes the world as a place of clear thinking about ethics as determined by duty. Moreover, Hegel urges against this approach by claiming that it is contradictory to philosophy as it denies the knowledge of metaphysical truth. The argument raised by the two philosophers brings into question the essence of limiting what humans claim to know. Kant advocates for a philosophical approach that is subjective, part of the structure of our minds, while Hegel claims that the various categories have objective reality (Fieser). However, modern philosophy embraces the opinion of exceeding skepticism that limits what we claim to know. By this it calls for examining knowledge before using it, for example, if a person attempts to know God, the essence of human being and so on, they must commit themselves to investigate the capacity of knowledge itself to determine if it is possible to accomplish such desires.

Is your time best spent reading someone else’s essay? Get a 100% original essay FROM A CERTIFIED WRITER!

Save 25%

The idea of limiting knowledge is reinforced by the Scottish scholar and philosopher, David Hume. Hume indicates that the human reasoning process is inherently flawed, and this compromises all that people claim to know. The problem with following the absolute rules is that it corrupts human reasoning and influences the world, thus shutting out other probabilities that should be exploited. For example, when a person follows the predetermined path of thinking, they will conclude a ball is round. But when a person reasons in other ways, they may find that the roundness of the ball is only a matter of their opinion. Such a conclusion is that maybe the ball is round, or perhaps it is not. In that way, it does not matter whether something is right or not since human reasoning cannot be trusted (Fieser). In other words, this approach is like solving a math problem, where it does not matter whether you got then right answer or not, as wrong as mistakes were made in the calculations. Therefore, human judgment and reasoning are defective, and what people believe to be the metaphysical truth maybe not (Fetcher). To accommodate each other; humans must be willing to think beyond the paradigms of what they think they know.

However, this approach in contemporary philosophy has not been without criticism, as Hegel opposes the theory of limiting human knowledge. He claims that by examining and questioning the validity of the metaphysics before using it creates a crisis by denying the truth evident in this metaphysical. By this, the critics say that it is not possible to investigate and criticize an instrument by using it in the very particular task that they were designed to accomplish (Kadir). Based on this, only an act of knowledge can examine if someone is knowledgeable. Inline to this, Hegel warns against the questioning of the metaphysics by claiming that one must, first of all, acknowledge and understand the cognition which is referred as the instrument, or the path that one uses to make the discovery. The philosopher rejects the call to examine knowledge before applying because one must be knowledgeable enough to explore it, and thus this act amounts to paradox. In other words, it like wanting to know before one knows, an attempt to be a professional swimmer without using the water (Kadir). For knowledge must be examined only when it is in use, and based on the critics, there is no possibility of the preliminary examination.

In the effort to refute the opponents claim, it can be seen that humans claim to know a lot of facts that they cannot prove beyond doubts. For example, Nail Armstrong and his team were the first people to land on the moon (Fetcher). Such claims of knowledge cannot be proved beyond a reasonable doubt to be the absolute truth. In such cases, one way of understanding the idea of knowledge is looking at the various ways that we acquire knowledge. For this reason, modern philosophers have maintained the traditional concept of learning from two sources (Fieser). The first area that people acquire knowledge from is through experience; such emanates from seeing something, hearing, and doing. The second source is the knowledge that does not emanate from experience, but instead originates from reasoning, an example being scientific and mathematical truths.

Conclusion

To conclude, I reiterate my thesis that humanist subordinate everything, which includes science and knowledge, to the test of personal benefits. For this reason, modern philosophy should continue limiting the claims of human knowledge as it contributes to upholding morality and allows people to tolerate each other. There are so many things that humans are yet to comprehend fully, and it is only by challenging the metaphysics of philosophy can people explore beyond limitations. The probability of maybe what we believe to be true may be wrong, allows people from all walks of life to accommodate one another. On the other hand, humans must remember that all the sources of knowledge have severe limitations, and the definition of knowledge can be picked apart by many Gettier-type examples. The human effort to gain understanding must not be deemed as leisure as it would lead to the point of compromise. But pursuing education is a matter of human survival, that cannot be cast aside or claim to have been fully mastered. The desire to acquire new knowledge is very tempting, and the dangers of absolute knowledge must discourage humans from resisting such temptations.

Works Cited

Fetcher, Joseph. "The Moral Limits of Knowledge." Welcome to VQR Online | VQR Online, 12 Dec. 2003, www.vqronline.org/essay/moral-limits-knowledge.

Fieser, James. "CHAPTER 6: KNOWLEDGE." The University of Tennessee at Martin, 2019, www.utm.edu/staff/jfieser/class/120/6-knowledge.htm.

Kadir. "KANT'S THEORY OF KNOWLEDGE AND HEGEL'S CRITICISM." Home >> DergiPark, 2001, dergipark.org.tr/en/download/article-file/214796. Accessed 28 Sept. 2019.