Notice: Undefined offset: 0 in /home/rmhu6fn7r820/public_html/wp-content/themes/opskill-123help/functions.php on line 75
Notice: Trying to get property 'status' of non-object in /home/rmhu6fn7r820/public_html/wp-content/themes/opskill-123help/functions.php on line 75
Essay > Words: 928 > Rating: Excellent > Buy full access at $1
According to early psychologist, Russel, human beings obtain knowledge by acquaintance through experience or direct casual interaction between an individual and the object that he/she perceives. The sense data that an individual acquire from the perceived object will enable them get acquainted despite the fact they cannot truly understand the object itself. In other cases, individuals get acquainted with their own sense of self and ideas. Practically, some people get acquainted only after observing an individual’s behavior. Propositional knowledge should be defined as a true belief because it enables an individual gets acquainted with the relation of correspondence that holds between facts and proposition. Justified true belief occurs only when an individual has an explicit understanding that certain proposition is correct and true in virtue of a fact. For example, a person is justified in believing that he/she is encountering pain if they are directly acquainted with this particular pain. According to acquaintance theorists, an individual can justified belief explains propositional knowledge only when one is acquainted with particular occurrence.
Traditionally, propositional knowledge justifies truth held by a justified belief. Belief is something than an individual does not know unless they consider true in their minds; and if they do not belief it, then they have no clue about it. Importantly, there exist no knowledge of false propositions thus actual believe in falsehood is a misapprehension as opposed to being knowledge. Therefore, a true belief ought to be supported by suitable justifications and there should be adequate evidence for the conviction.
The terms “prior” and “posterior” are commonly used in epistemology to differentiate difference types of justifications, knowledge or arguments. In philosophy, prior justification is not influenced by experience. A perfect example is that “All bachelors are not married.” On the other hand, posterior justification is influenced by empirical evidence or experience. For instance, “Some young children are very happy. Another distinction between the two is that posteriori justification makes reference to experience despite the fact that the underlying issue pertains how an individual understands or knows particular proposition or claim in question. In posterior justification, what grounds an individual belief is the major concern. A prior justification is sometimes used to describe an argument made by an individual without following a logical basis i.e. absence of evidence or analysis.
Despite the fact that both terms have been used to mean different things in history of philosophy, the terms have constantly labeled two distinct epistemological notions. Therefore, prior and posteriori knowledge have intuitive difference which philosophers.............
Type: Essay || Words: 928 Rating || ExcellentSubscribe at $1 to view the full document.
Buy access at $1