Introduction+to+Justified+True+Belief+and+the+3+S+Approach

Back to Home>Back to What is Knowledge

Download of Below-

What is a “good reason”, a justification, for a belief? Do we rely on ourselves (our reasoning, our intuition, our memory, our faith our senses) or others (observations, those in authority, “experts”)? Even we can find a justification to support our belief, how can we be sure that it is actually true? Plato (that’s Plato with a T not Plado the child’s toy) proposes one system for verifying truth, justified true belief. Plato proposed a method to test any claim of propositional knowledge. According to his method, propositional knowledge must meet the following criteria: · The statement must be believed to be true. · The belief itself must be true: True for everyone, not just you. True despite what people might think and believe to be true. Eternally true. · This “true belief” must be justified by one or more of the following: By logic. By empirical evidence. By memory. By authority. While propositional knowledge is the most well know of the philosophical ways to discuss knowledge, it is not the only way to “know” something. Below is a list of other possible ways of knowing: · Knowledge by conviction (faith, belief). · Knowledge by introspection (self-awareness, includes empathy). · Knowledge by practice (how to ride a bike, play an instrument). · Knowledge by acquaintance (includes everything we do and everything that happens to us, memory, intuition). · Knowledge by instinct (genetic, not learned, behaviors).
 * Introduction:**

Thinking back to your original “I know” statements, which type of knowledge do you believe was used to “justify” each claim.


 * //Which type of knowledge to you trust more than the others? The least? Explain//**

A diagnostic that can be used to test the reliability (how true it is) of knowledge claims made by others is the Source, Statements, and Self approach. The 3 S approach is a system that can be helpful to examine knowledge claims and begin your search for truth. Review the below questions and use them next time you encounter a knowledge claim.
 * **Source** || **Statements** || **Self** ||
 * // Does the source (as far as I know) seem to have senses that function normally for an act of observation and a sound mind for interpretation? // || // Are the statements free from internal contradictions and logical fallacies? // || // Do I recognize myself bias for or against a particular source or set of statements? Can I detect in myself pre-judgments based on religion, race, political attitudes, nationality, sexual preference, age, musical taste, style of dress, etc, which might influence my assessment? // ||
 * // Is the source (as far as I know) free from the influence of alcohol, drugs or any other substance, which might significantly affect the act of perception? // || // Is bias observable in the selection of details, emphasis placed on those details or slanted word choice? // || // Do I apply critical thinking to what I want to believe as well as to what I do not want to believe? // ||
 * // Does this source have a reputation for being honest and accurate? // || // Does the goal seem to be report or to persuade? // || // If I use my own past experiences and understanding as a basis on which to judge the plausibility of statements (coherence), how extensive is that past experience? // ||
 * // Does this person/book/magazine/newspaper/blog etc. have any recognizable special interest, bias or other motive for conscious or unconscious deception? // || // Do the statements use any graphs, photographs, paintings, or other visual accompaniments? Are they emotionally affecting? Can they be verified against an independent source? // || // Am I open to having past assumptions-even the most basic ones-questioned? Am I willing to examine evidence and arguments which counter my current beliefs? // ||
 * // Is this source an authority relevant to the topic under consideration (e.g. a doctor of medical issues)? // || // Are the statements presented for belief supported by any form of justification? (Reason? Evidence? Memory? Intuition? Authority? Faith?) // || // Is it possible to separate my beliefs in private beliefs, based on whatever justification convinces me personally (e.g. religion) and public beliefs, based on justification, which must convince others as well (e.g. science)? // ||
 * // Does this source acknowledge counter arguments or limitations of its own knowledge? // || // Is the justification given convincing for private/individual belief and/or public/group belief? // || // To what extent are my private and public beliefs mutually exclusive? Are they separable or inter-penetrating? // ||
 * // Is this source in accord with or consistent with other sources? // || // Do the statements (as far as I can tell) pass truth tests? Are the statements coherent with my prior understanding, or with the body of information already established in the field? // || // What is my attitude toward belief? Is there a difference between what “I do”, “I can”, or “should” believe? Is there a moral dimension to what I should believe? Is an ethical principle about believing a belief about a belief? // ||