philosophy discussion4
2/10/2018
1
Phil 2: Puzzles and Paradoxes
Prof. Sven Bernecker
University of California, Irvine
Problem of
the Criterion
Three paradoxes of understanding:
• Paradox of Analysis
• Problem of the Criterion
• Hermeneutic Circle
2
• Sextus Empiricus (160-210
AD). Physician and philosopher
who lived in Egypt, Italy and
Greece.
• Georg Wilhelm Friedrich
Hegel (1770 – 1831). German
philosopher of the late
Enlightenment. Hugely
influential.
• Roderick Chisholm (1916 –
1999). American philosopher
known for his work on
epistemology, metaphysics, free
will, value theory, and the
philosophy of perception. He
taught at Brown University.
3
Theory of Knowledge
Two questions in the theory of knowledge (epistemology):
A. What do we know? What is the extent of our knowledge? Can we know anything at all?
B. What is knowledge? What are the necessary and sufficient conditions (or criteria) of knowledge? What does the term ‘knowledge’ mean?
• Knowledge has traditionally been defined as justified true belief. But this analysis of the concept of knowledge has come under attack. There are competing analyses of the concept of knowledge.
2/10/2018
2
Problem of the Criterion
Question A: What do we know? What is the extent of our knowledge?
Question B: What are the necessary and sufficient conditions of
knowledge? What are the criteria of knowledge?
1) You cannot answer question A until you have answered question B.
2) You cannot answer question B until you have answered question A.
C) Therefore, you cannot answer either question.
• Problem: We cannot answer question A without knowing the answer to B. You can only identify instances of knowledge if you already know what the necessary and sufficient conditions for knowledge are.
• And we cannot answer question B without knowing the answer to A? You can only know what the necessary and sufficient conditions for knowledge are if you are already able to identify instances of knowledge.
Solutions to Problem of the Criterion
• Methodists assume they have an answer to B on the basis of
which they figure out their answer to A.
• Methodists assumes they already know what the criteria for
knowledge are, and proceed on this basis the issue of
whether or not we have any knowledge.
• Particularist assume they have an answer to A and on the basis
of it they work out their answer to B.
• Rather than assuming that one can identify the criteria for
knowledge independently of examining any particular instances of
knowledge, particularists claim that one should instead assume
that one can correctly identify particular instances of knowledge
and proceed on this basis to determine what the criteria of
knowledge are.
8
2/10/2018
3
• Skeptics claim that neither question can be answered in a
non-circular way.
9
Pros and Cons
• Pro methodism: methodism leaves it open whether
skepticism is true (whether there is anything that meets the
criteria of knowledge)
• Con methodism: It is a mystery how we can get a grip on
the criteria for knowledge without appealing to particular
instances of knowledge.
10
• Pro particularism: It seems more plausible to suppose
that we can correctly identify particular cases of
knowledge independently of a definition of knowledge
than to suppose that we can identify what the criteria for
knowledge are without prior appeal to cases of
knowledge.
• Con particularism: it assumes the falsity of skepticism.
11