Kelp (2015) makes a helpful distinction between two broad camps here. The Problem of the External World 2. epistemological shift pros and cons - consultoresayc.co One helpful way to think about this is as follows: if one takes a paradigmatic case of an individual who understands a subject matter thoroughly, and manipulates the credence the agent has toward the propositions constituting the subject matter, how low can one go before the agent no longer understands the subject matter in question? For one thing, it is prudent to note up front that there are uses of understanding that, while important more generally in philosophy, fall outside the purview of mainstream epistemology. How should we distinguish between peripheral beliefs about a subject matter and beliefs that are not properly, Understanding entails true beliefs of the form. The topic of epistemic value has only relatively recently received sustained attention in mainstream epistemology. What is curiosity? The possession of such judgment plausibly lines up more closely with ability possession (that is, (i)-(vi)) than with propositional attitude possession. Elgin, C. Exemplification, Idealization, and Understanding in M. Surez (ed. Argues that we should replace the main developed accounts of understanding with earlier accounts of scientific explanation. For those who wonder about whether the often-discussed grasping associated with understanding might just amount to the possession of further beliefs (rather than, say, the possession of manipulative abilities), this type of view may seem particularly attractive (and comparatively less mysterious). south east england accent; spend billionaires money game; kaplan data entry work from home. Knowledge in a Social World. Understanding in Epistemology | Internet Encyclopedia of Philosophy Riaz (2015), Rohwer (2014) and Morris (2012) have continued to uphold this line on understandings compatibility with epistemic luck and defend this line against some of the objections that are examined below. Kvanvig, J. Section 4 examines the relationship between understanding and types of epistemic luck that are typically thought to undermine knowledge. If so, then the internally consistent delusion objection typically leveled against weakly nonfactive views raises its head. New York: Routledge, 2011. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2011. And, relatedly in social epistemology, we might wonder what if any testimonial transmission principles hold for understanding, and whether there are any special hearer conditions demanded by testimonial understanding acquisition that are not shared in cases of testimonial knowledge acquisition. On this basis Pritchard insists that Grimms analogy breaks down. Thus, given that understanding that p and knowing that p can in ordinary contexts be used synonymously (for example, understanding that it will rain is just to know that it will rain) we can paraphrase Zagzebskis point with no loss as: understanding X entails knowing that one understands X. Zagzebski does not mean to say that to understand X, one must also understand ones own understanding of X (as this threatens a psychologically implausible regress), but rather, that to understand X one must also understand that one understands X. Zagzebski (2001) and Kvanvig (2003), have suggested that understandings immunity to being undermined by the kinds of epistemic luck which undermine knowledge is one of the most important ways in which understanding differs from knowledge. Khalifas (2013) view of understanding is a form of explanatory idealism. In other words, even though there is no such gas as that referred to in the law, accepting the law need not involve believing the law to be true and thus believing there to be some gas with properties that it lacks. The following sections consider why understanding might have such additional value. As Zagzebski (2009: 141) remarks, different uses of understanding seem to mean so many different things that it is hard to identify the state that has been ignored (italics added). Consider how some people think they grasp the ways in which their zodiac sign has an influence on their life path, yet their sense of understanding is at odds with the facts of the matter. (2007: 37-8). Utilize at least 2 credible sources to support your position presented in the paper. Ithaca, N.Y.: Cornell University Press, 2005. In terms of parallels with the understanding debate, it is important to note that the knowledge of causes formula is not limited to the traditional propositional reading. Sliwa, P. IVUnderstanding and Knowing. and (ii) what qualifies a group of beliefs as a system in the sense that is at issue when it is claimed that understanding involves grasping relationships or connections within a system of beliefs? An overview of issues relating to epistemic value, including discussion of understanding as a higher epistemic state. Would this impede ones understanding? If making reasonable sense merely requires that some event or experience make sense to the epistemic agent herself, Bakers view appears open, as Grimm (2011) has suggested, to counterexamples according to which an agent knows that something happened and yet accounts for that occurrence by way of a poorly supported theory. What is it to have this ability to modify some mental representation? Some of Pritchards (for example, 2009) earlier work on understanding uses the terminology atomistic understanding as synonymous with understanding-why and indeed his more recent work shifts to using the latter term. Kvanvig, J. One can split views on this question into roughly three positions that advocate varying strengths of a factivity constraint on objectual understanding. Dordrecht: Reidel, 1975. That said, the question of whether, and if so to what extent, understanding is compatible with epistemic luck, lacks any contemporary consensus, though this is an aspect of understanding that is receiving increased attention. Autore dell'articolo: Articolo pubblicato: 16/06/2022 Categoria dell'articolo: fixed gantry vs moving gantry cnc Commenti dell'articolo: andy's dopey transposition cipher andy's dopey transposition cipher Hills (2009) is an advocate of such a view of understanding-why in particular. The thought is that, in cases of achievement, the relevant success must be primarily creditable to the exercise of the agents abilities, rather than to some other factor (for example, luck). Although a range of epistemologists highlighting some of the important features of understanding-why and objectual understanding have been discussed, there are many interesting topics that warrant further research. There is little work focusing exclusively on the prospects of a non-factive construal of understanding-why; most authors, with a few exceptions, take it that understanding-why is obviously factive in a way that is broadly analogous to propositional knowledge. The ambiguity between assenting to a necessary proposition and the grasping or seeing of certain properties and their necessary relatedness mirrors the ambiguity between assenting to a casual proposition and grasping or seeing of the terms of the causal relata: their modal relatedness. Specifically, he points out that an omniscient agent who knows everything and intuitively therefore understands every phenomenon might do so while being entirely passivenot drawing interferences, making predictions or manipulating representations (in spite of knowing, for example, which propositions can be inferred from others). Kvanvig, J. ), Intellectual Virtue: Perspectives from Ethics and Epistemology. Pragmatism as an epistemological approach accentuates the reasoning of theories and concepts by studying their consequences and goals, values and interests they support. Kvanvig (2003; 2009) offers such a view, according to which understanding of some subject matter is incompatible with false central beliefs about the subject matter. Open Document. Elgin (2007), like Zagzebski, is sympathetic to a weak factivity constraint on objectual understanding, where the object of understanding is construed as a fairly comprehensive, coherent body of information (2007: 35). (For example, is it a kind of knowledge, another kind of propositional attitude, an ability, and so on? Though in light of this fact, it is not obvious that understanding is the appropriate term for this state. The Oxford Handbook of Social Justice in Music Education However, epistemologists have recently started to turn more attention to the epistemic state or states of understanding, asking questions about its nature, relationship to knowledge, connection with explanation, and potential status as a special type of cognitive achievement. ), The Continuum Companion to Epistemology. Consider, for instance, the felicity of the question: Am I understanding this correctly? and I do not know if I understand my own defense mechanisms; I think I understand them, but I am not sure. The other side of the coin is that one often can think that one understands things that one does not (for example, Trout 2007). Contrary to premise (3), such abilities (of the sort referenced by Khalifa in premise 2 and 3) arguably need not involve discriminating between explanations, so long as one supposes that discriminating between explanations is something one has the reliable ability to do only if one could not very easily form a belief of the form
when this is false. Firstly, Kvanvig introduces propositional understanding as what is attributed in sentences that take the form I understand that X (for example, John understands that he needs to meet Harold at 2pm). Our culture is shifting, Dede argues, not just from valuing the opinions of experts to the participatory culture of YouTube or Facebook, but from understanding knowledge as fixed and linear to a . If Pritchard is right to claim that understanding is always a strong cognitive achievement, then understanding is always finally valuable if cognitive achievement is also always finally valuable, and moreover, valuable in a way that knowledge is not. New York: Routledge, 2011. Working hypotheses and idealizations need not, on this line, be viewed as representative of realityidealizations can be taken as useful fictions, and working hypotheses are recognized as the most parsimonious theories on the table without thereby being dubbed as wholly accurate. Bradford, G. Achievement. Though her work on understanding is not limited to scientific understanding (for example, Elgin 2004), one notable argument she has made is framed to show that a factive conception cannot do justice to the cognitive contributions of science and that a more flexible conception can (2007: 32). For example, you read many of your books on screens and e-readers today. Usually philosophical problems are overcome not by their resolution but rather by redefinition. On the one hand, there is the increasing support for virtue epistemology that began in the 1980s, and on the other there is growing dissatisfaction with the ever-complicated attempt to generate an account of knowledge that is appropriately immune to Gettier-style counterexamples (see, for example, DePaul 2009). Assuming that we need an account of degrees of understanding if we are going to give an account of outright understanding (as opposed to working the other way around, as he thinks many others are inclined to do), Kelp (2015) suggests we adopt a knowledge based account of objectual understanding according to which maximal understanding of a given phenomenon is to be cashed out in terms of fully comprehensive and maximally well-connected knowledge of that phenomenon. Thirdly, Kelp (2015) has an objection that he thinks all who favor a manipulationist line should find worrying. A novel interpretation of the traditional view according to which understanding-why can be explained in terms of knowledge of causes. It will accordingly be helpful to narrow our focus to the varieties of understanding that feature most prominently in the epistemological literature. On the other hand, there are explanationists, who argue that it is knowledge or evaluation of explanations that is doing the relevant work. This is the idea that one has shifted, or changed, the way he or she takes in knowledge. For example, you read many of your books on screens and e-readers today. It seems as though understanding would possibly be undermined in a case where someone relying on the ideal gas law failed to appreciate it as an idealization. Claims that understanding is entirely compatible with both intervening and environmental forms of veritic luck. To borrow a case from Riggs, stealing an Olympic medal or otherwise cheating to attain it lacks the kind of value one associates with earning the medal, through ones own skill. Kelp, C. Understanding Phenomena. Synthese (2015). De Regt, H. and Dieks, D. A Contextual Approach to Scientific Understanding. Synthese 144 (2005): 137-170. The epistemological shift in the present in the study - Course Hero The Epistemology Shift: Embrace The Change - GradesFixer This is a change from the past. Builds an account of understanding according to which understanding a subject matter involves possessing a representation that could be manipulated in a useful way. The cons of the epistemology shift that is a major - Course Hero This line merits discussion not least because the idea that understanding-why comes by degrees is often ignored in favor of discussing the more obvious point that understanding a subject matter clearly comes by degrees.
The Perfect Chocolate Brown Paint Color, Defective Speedometer Wisconsin, Labelling Theory In Health And Social Care, Warhammer 40k Lelith Hesperax Fanfiction, Jayme Street Tommy Tiernan First Wife, Articles E