A Belief that is Justified is True
The point of Plato’s dialogue the Theaetetus is to explore the definition of
knowledge. Socrates and Theaetetus have three major attempts to define knowledge beginning with knowledge as perception, true belief and with an account. In the end, all attempts fail to provide an adequate definition of knowledge leading into a form of circular reasoning where we need knowledge to define knowledge. Socrates summarizes the dialogue's main trajectory, stating
“it is surely quite simple minded, when we’re trying to find out what knowledge is, to claim that it is correct belief accompanied by knowledge, whether or difference or of anything else. - Neither can perception, then, Theatetus, be knowledge, nor true belief, nor the addition of an account along with true belief.” (Plato 210a7-b2. Pg 98)
There exists a misunderstanding in Plato’s conception of knowledge which leads to circular reasoning. I will first exemplify the arguments discussed in the dialogue then, propose a solution to the definition of knowledge.
If knowledge is perception, then each person’s perception would always be true. Knowledge as perception would make the truth of knowledge subjective. Another issue is that we know of false perception, which is not knowledge. Socrates then states that knowledge is found in the reasoning from our perceptions. He says,
“knowledge does not reside in what we directly experience, but rather in our reasoning about those experiences...in the latter... it is possible to get a hold on being and truth.” (Plato 61)
As they continue their discussion they come to state that to be a knower is to not have false beliefs. Truth or being correct about a state of affairs is necessary for knowledge. Here, Plato introduces how one thinks about the beliefs they have stating,
“The image I have of the soul as it is in thought is exactly of it as in conversation with itself.” (67)
It is not just true beliefs but a certain arrangement of thoughts makes them
true. It is not just your thought, the content of one’s belief, but how that thought is connected to other thoughts, the interconnectedness and reasonableness of one’s thinking, that produces justification. This justification is the determining factor of something being true. Certain kinds of justification, then, will produce knowledge.
The first real mistake that Plato makes is a category mistake that leads to circular reasoning. The definition of Knowledge involves procedural knowledge or ‘know how’ by training. One must learn to reason to offer knowledge. Knowing how is different than knowing that. Learning how to think, through reasoning, produces knowledge.
The second issue comes out when Socrates discusses the 3 forms of an
account. The problem they find is that the third type of account, the distinguishing mark, becomes another form of knowledge. Socrates defines thinking as, “Talk that the soul conducts with itself about whatever it is investigating.” (Plato 67) When Socrates is
discussing pulling the little pieces of knowledge from the aviary, he is mistaken. (78) He
is pulling thoughts out of the aviary, not bits of knowledge. The act of retrieving, like
reasoning, is know-how or process knowledge and different from the general question
of what knowledge is. The conceptual problem with knowledge is that there are two types of knowledge, the knowledge of something and the knowledge of how to do something. The truth or falsity of the idea exists in reality. In the person, it is how the account or justification is structured, which can lead to a true disposition. Knowledge is when the true disposition matches correctly with the way reality really is.
Knowledge is generally seen as a noun, a thing that Socrates pulls from the soul
and as something to be possessed. However, it may be best to conceptualize
knowledge as a verb, an event that occurs. When a person has a belief and through the
process of reasonable justification, it is true, an event occurs where that person has
knowledge. The thought that is used in the justification, is a thing the person has, but
knowledge is a specific kind of thought arranged with other thoughts that produces an
event of correspondence.
The solution to the problem of knowledge has been shown by differentiating between process knowledge that requires training, and the knowledge of something via JTB. The mistake that Socrates has within his aviary analogy can be resolved by not seeing knowledge as something to be possessed but an event that occurs when a believer develops an account that produces true thoughts. The information within the account are thoughts, not knowledge, and the procedural knowledge is different from the kind of knowledge in a JTB.
Plato. Rowe, Christopher. “Theaetetus and Sophist.” Cambridge University Press.
United Kingdom, 2015.
© Achilles Atlas Justice and achillesjustice.com, 2018-21. Unauthorized use and/or duplication of this material without express and written permission from this site’s author and/or owner is strictly prohibited. Excerpts and links may be used, provided that full and clear credit is given to Achilles Atlas Justice and achillesjustice.com with appropriate and specific direction to the original content.
Comentarios