Essay Sample on Knowledge, Belief and Faith

Introduction

There are various attempts that explain knowledge of a given proposition. These attempts include the standard conditions of knowledge, justified true belief. According to Plato S knows P when P is true, S has belief in P, and S is justified in believing in P (Cornford, 2013). To understand something for example rain, the usual basic knowledge is that rain has to be true. The proposition has to be true for a person cannot one that is false. An individual must believe the proposition because he or she cannot know it unless he believes in it. Gettier claimed that there are circumstances in which an individual's belief may be true and justified, but fail to count as knowledge. He argued that although it is essential for knowledge to be justified in an individual's true belief is not satisfactory (Gettier 1963). A person can believe in a preposition but still fail to be recognized in the knowledge category. Gettier contend that there are certain situations in which an individual does not have knowledge, despite meeting all of the conditions.

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

Save 25%

To have knowledge an individual must have a belief. This concept was developed by Plato when they suggested that one to believe in a situation there has to be some kind of justification. For instance, the cure for cancer is unknown and hence that idea to cure it does not exist on anyone's mind. No one, therefore, believes that cancer can be cured because no doctor has knowledge about its cure. The doctors who wish to cure cancer need to have true belief on the procedure to cure it. Currently, some have a belief that early diagnosis is good because at that stage it can be cured easily. This is just a belief without truth in it because most people who are diagnosed with cancer and treated at an early stage are later treated with the same disease. Knowledge is not based on any belief since it has to be accompanied with truth in it. One can also believe that a computer is a table and his or her belief cannot be considered as knowledge. Knowledge depends on facts since not everything can be true. If someone believes that his computer is a table, then that should be true and not just mere imagination that it is a table.

To have knowledge of a proposition one has to believe it. For instance, if one was asked to answer questions regarding capital cities of different countries but he or she does not know any of them. The person may do guesswork and answer all the questions. To the surprise, all the guessed answers turn out to be correct. This indicates that when at school, the individual learned all the countries and their capital cities in school and has not forgotten about them. The individual had an unconscious knowledge and that is why he or she has answered all the questions accurately. Unconscious belief leads to an unconscious belief which is significant in determining an individual knowledge towards a situation. Knowledge requires belief and n case of an unconscious knowledge one has to show some consistency.

Gettier contended that sometimes one can have knowledge without belief and justification. An example of a scenario of knowledge without belief is of a student who takes an exam without being certain of the answers. He becomes nervous because he does not believe that the answers he is writing are correct. However, he gets everything correct when the teacher brings a paper after marking. This shows that he knew the answers, but did not believe he did. In this case, belief does not account as a necessary condition for knowledge. There are also scenarios of knowledge without justification. For instance, there are people who can tell what others are feeling without justifying how they know it. There is an explanation how they know one is sad or happy but they do not justify it.

Gettier contended that although one's belief can be justified and true about situations but not fall in the knowledge category. He argued that justified true belief is not sufficient for knowledge although it is a necessary condition. He proposed examples where all the conditions for knowledge were met but the situation failed to fall on knowledge category. He objects the classical account of knowledge using two thought experiments. According to his objection justified true belief does not "constitute a sufficient condition for the truth of the preposition" (Gettier 1963). One of the scenarios he offers to show justified true belief does not result to knowledge is the case of job application. Smith and Jones make applications for a certain job. The president of the organization had already told Smith that Jones would be hired. Smith predicts the person who would get hired based on the number of coins he has in his pocket. Smith goes ahead and counts Jones' coins while they are still in his pocket entailing the proposition that the one who will be hired has ten coins in his pocket. He believes in the proposition which later turns out to be true. However, Smith did not notice that he was the one with ten coins in his pocket therefore he gets the job. Form this case, one may think that he know something because he believe it and he is justified to believe that it is true but turn out to be the opposite. This scenario is example showing that justified true belief is not sufficient for knowledge.

Another instance demonstrating that justified true belief is not sufficient for knowledge is offered by Harman (1973). In his example in the past when sure-fire matches are scratched, they always lit. Unfortunately, one particular match is defective and can only light when lit at six hundred degrees which are higher than the normal temperature required for lighting a match (Harman, 1973). Fortunately, when the defective match is scratched, a tip is a strike by a burst of Q-radiation which raises the surface temperature to 600. The defective match light at this temperature but although one believes that it is because of scratching and believe it is the truth. He is, in turn, justified to believe so but this is not an instance of knowledge. In this case, justified true belief is not sufficient for knowledge because the defective match lit as a result of q-radiation burst. It was unknown that the match would light and this could be an incidence of luck.

Luck does not count and that is the reason why Gettier contends that justified true belief is not sufficient for knowledge. He uses cases which show counter-argument where a belief was true and an individual was justified in trusting it (Gettie, 1963). However, the justification was wrong leaving the situation as a subject of luck of what the person believed was true. For example if one may see a colleague driving a car he may think that he is the owner of the car and his belief is true and justified. On the contrary, it could be that the car the colleague was driving belonged to another person. The colleague is the only person who knows the real owner of the car and this evidence is confidential because he wants people to think that he owns it. Another example would be two friends, joy and john who are trapped in the desert. Joy looks at a mirage and thinks that she can see an oasis. She believes that when they walk in that direction, they would find an oasis. The oasis would be there but it is hidden by sand dune. Joy think that she sees an oasis hence she is justified that she sees it. She point and tell John that there is an oasis over there. In reality, what she does not see an oasis but coincidentally there is one in that direction. She has met all the three conditions of knowledge because she believes that an oasis exists over there. It is true that an oasis exist despite the fact that it is hidden in the sand dune. She is also justified in believing there is an oasis. It is clear that joy has a justified true believe but it does not fall in the knowledge category. This example shows justified true belief is not sufficient for knowledge because despite the fact that Joy believed that an oasis exists in the desert and it was true and she is justified to believe so but this does not mean that she knows with certainty that it is there.

Gettier objection cases challenge the conditions of true believers of knowledge since, in reality, some prepositions happen as a result of luck or pure chance. It is difficult to explain luck and its probability gives the same result of knowledge. Although a certain situation is true and a person believe that the situations are true. He is justified to believe so but this is not sufficient to define that he has known about it. True justified belief does not also provide enough evidence that one has knowledge because the truth is subjective (Gettier 1963). An individual can believe false information as true therefore this cannot be regarded as knowledge. Evidence to prove knowledge is analyzed through data, experiments, physical proof and experience.

Conclusion

In conclusion, the three standard conditions of knowledge require one to believe in a scenario, it has to be true and one has to justify it. gettier objects this conditions and contends that justification and belief are not sufficient conditions for knowledge. It is hard to analyze knowledge since many instances resemble one another. Sometimes people think that they know something because they believe and justify their opinion but this does not mean that they have knowledge. To prove that one has knowledge of a certain situation need physical proof, experiments, and experience. One has to be certain of a proposition because concluding it based on luck cannot be considered as knowledge at all. From the well-explained instances, Gettier was right when he argued that justified true belief is not sufficient for knowledge.

References

Cornford, F. M. (2013). Plato's theory of knowledge. Routledge.Gettier E. (1963) "Is Justified True Belief Knowledge?" (Located in the JSTOR library database - Source: Analysis, Volume 23, Number 6, June 1963, pp. 121--123).Harman, G. (1973) Thought. Princeton university press