Because sensory perception is an important dimension of our understanding of the world, its function and scope should be examined and critically evaluated.
What are the necessary and sufficient conditions for S to know that p? We may distinguish, broadly, between a traditional and a non-traditional approach to answering this question. False propositions cannot be known. Therefore, knowledge requires truth. Therefore, knowledge requires belief.
Thus we arrive at a tripartite analysis of knowledge as JTB: S knows that p if and only if p is true and S is justified in believing that p. According to this analysis, the three conditions — truth, belief, and justification — are individually necessary and jointly sufficient for knowledge.
They diverge, however, as soon as we proceed to be more specific about exactly how justification is to fulfill this role.
According to evidentialism, what makes a belief justified in this sense is the possession of evidence. NTK, on the other hand, conceives of the role of justification differently.
One prominent idea is that this is accomplished if, and only if, a belief originates in reliable cognitive processes or faculties. This view is known as reliabilism. There are cases of JTB that do not qualify as cases of knowledge. JTB, therefore, is not sufficient for knowledge. Cases like that — known as Gettier-cases[ 5 ] — arise because neither the possession of evidence nor origination in reliable faculties is sufficient for ensuring that a belief is not true merely because of luck.
Consider the well-known case of barn-facades: Henry drives through a rural area in which what appear to be barns are, with the exception of just one, mere barn facades. From the road Henry is driving on, these facades look exactly like real barns. This is known as the Gettier problem.
According to TK, solving the problem requires a fourth condition. According to some NTK theorists, it calls for refining the concept of reliability. They would say that, if we conceive of knowledge as reliably produced true belief, there is no need for justification.
Reliabilism, then, comes in two forms: As the former, it views justification to be an important ingredient of knowledge but, unlike TK, grounds justification solely in reliability. As a theory of knowledge, reliabilism asserts that justification is not necessary for knowledge; rather, reliably produced true belief provided the notion of reliability is suitably refined to rule out Gettier cases is sufficient for it.
When we discuss the nature of justification, we must distinguish between two different issues: Second, what makes beliefs justified? It is important to keep these issues apart because a disagreement on how to answer the second question will be a mere verbal dispute, if the disagreeing parties have different concepts of justification in mind.
Here is an example: Tom asked Martha a question, and Martha responded with a lie. Was she justified in lying? What might Jane mean when she thinks that Martha was justified in responding with a lie? A natural answer is this: She means that Martha was under no obligation to refrain from lying.
This understanding of justification, commonly labeled deontological, may be defined as follows: S is justified in doing x if and only if S is not obliged to refrain from doing x.
Deontological Justification DJ S is justified in believing that p if and only if S believes that p while it is not the case that S is obliged to refrain from believing that p.
Whereas when we evaluate an action, we are interested in assessing the action from either a moral or a prudential point of view, when it comes to beliefs, what matters is the pursuit of truth. The relevant kinds of obligations, then, are those that arise when we aim at having true beliefs.
Exactly what, though, must we do in the pursuit of this aim? According to one answer, the one favored by evidentialists, we ought to believe in accord with our evidence.Role of Teacher in Enhancing Learning Achievement of Child Role of Teacher in school management to enhance learning India has .
ToK 12 14 How does the role of reason compare with the roles of the other ways of knowing? Why might some people think that reason is superior, and what consequences does holding this position have for the knowledge pursued and the methods considered appropriate in the pursuit?
Does the role of reason affect the degree of certainty in, or the social status of, the various areas of. Decision-making is a field of interest for philosophers, economists, psychologists, and neuroscientists, among others.
A fundamental question that drives research in this area is why do people who are presented with the same options make different choices? Organisational Behaviour and its Role in Management of Business psychological tests are conducted in organisations for selection of employees. Sense Perception and Areas of Knowledge What role does observation play in the methods used to pursue knowledge in different disciplines?
For example, are the conditions, function and results of observation the same for biology and human science? Consumers' preferences, behavior and perception of meat have been reviewed.
• There is a need to reduce uncertainty and tie expectations more closely to .