This would be the non-factive parallel to the standard view of grasping. This is the idea that one has shifted, or changed, the way he or she takes in knowledge. In Proceedings of the Aristotelian Society (Hardback) (Vol. Often-cited discussion of the fake barn counterexample to traditional accounts of knowledge that focus on justified true belief. He claims further that this description of the case undermines the intuition that the writers lack of understanding entails the readers lack of understanding. Morris (2012), like Rohwer, also defends lucky understandingin particular, understanding-why, or what he calls explanatory understanding). The context-sensitive element of Wilkenfelds account of understanding allows him to attribute adequate understanding to, for example, a student in an introductory history class and yet deny understanding to that student when the context shifts to place him in a room with a panel of experts. See further Bradford (2013; 2015) for resistance to the very suggestion that there can be weak achievements on Pritchards sensenamely, achievements that do not necessarily involve great effort, regardless of whether they are primarily due to ability. 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). Should we say that the use of the term understanding that applies to such cases should be of no interest to epistemology? Contains the paradigmatic case of environmental epistemic luck (that is, the fake barn case). The Value of Knowledge and the Pursuit of Understanding. Unlike de Regt and Dieks (2005), Wilkenfeld aims to propose an inclusive manipulation-based view that allows agents to have objectual understanding even if they do not have a theory of the phenomenon in question. sustainability scholarship 2021; lost vape centaurus replacement panels; Displacements of power in the realm of concepts accompany these new orientations. If we consider some goalsuch as the successful completion of a coronary bypassit is obvious that our attitude towards the successful coronary bypass is different when the completion is a matter of ability as opposed to luck. [] In fact, he claims, the two come apart in both directions: yielding knowledge without strong cognitive achievement andas in the case of understanding that lacks corresponding knowledgestrong cognitive achievement without knowledge. Hills herself does not believe that understanding-why is some kind of propositional knowledge, but she points out that even if it is there is nonetheless good cause to think that understanding-why is very unlike ordinary propositional knowledge. Rohwers inventive move involves a contrast case featuring unifying understanding, that is, understanding that is furnished from multiple sources, some good and some bad. Kvanvig, J. One can split views on this question into roughly three positions that advocate varying strengths of a factivity constraint on objectual understanding. It focuses on means of human knowledge acquisition and how to differentiate the truth knowledge claims from the false one. Is it a kind of knowledge, another kind of propositional attitude, an ability, and so forth? Resists Pritchards claim that there can be weak achievements, that is, ones that do not necessarily involve great effort. Relation question: What is the grasping relationship? This is because we dont learn about causes a priori. 115, No. This point aligns with the datum that we often attribute understanding by degrees. This broader interpretation seems well positioned to handle abstract object cases, for example, mathematical understanding, when the kind of understanding at issue is understanding-why. 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. However, Pritchard (2014) responds to Grimms latest proposal with a number of criticisms. It is also becoming an increasingly popular position to hold that understanding is more epistemically valuable than knowledge (see Kvanvig 2003; Pritchard 2010). This leaves us, however, with an interesting question about the point at which there is no understanding at all, rather than merely weaker or poorer understanding. In practice, individuals' epistemological beliefs determine how they think knowledge or truth can be comprehended, what problems - if any - are associated with various views of pursuing and presenting knowledge and what role researchers play in its discovery (Robson, 2002). If Kelps thought experiment works, manipulation of representations cannot be a necessary condition of understanding after all. 4 Pages. With each step in the sequence, we understand the motion of the planets better than we did before. But is understanding factive? 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. Epistemology is often defined as the theory of knowledge, and talk of propositional knowledge (that is, S knows that p) has dominated the bulk of modern literature in epistemology. facebook android official. Builds an account of understanding according to which understanding a subject matter involves possessing a representation that could be manipulated in a useful way. . Hetherington, S. There Can be Lucky Knowledge in M. Steup, J. Turri and E. Sosa (eds. The epistemological shift in the present In the study of epistemology, philosophers are concerned with the epistemological shift. A longer discussion of the nature of understanding and its distinctive value (in relation to the value of knowledge) than in his related papers. In such a case, Kvanvig says, this individual acquires an historical understanding of the Comanche dominance of the Southern plains of North America from the late 17th until the late 19th century (2003: 197). It is the idea that one has shifted, or changed, the way he or she takes in knowledge (Rayner, 2011).The fact that taking in knowledge has altered is evident in learning institutions today. Facebook Instagram Email. 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. It is moreover of interest to note that Khalifa (2013b) also sees a potential place for the notion of grasping in an account of understanding, though in a qualified sense. A good example here is what Riggs (2003) calls intelligibility, a close cousin of understanding that also implies a grasp of order, pattern and connection, but does not seem to require a substantial connection to truth. For example, in Whitcomb (2011) we find the suggestion that theoretical wisdom is a form of particularly deep understanding. Pritchard (2008: 8) points out thatfor exampleif one believes that ones house burned down because of the actions of an arsonist when it really burnt down because of faulty wiring, it just seems plain that one lacks understanding of why ones house burned down. For the purposes of thinking about understanding, some of the most important will include: (i) what makes a system of beliefs coherent? Section 3 examines the notion of grasping which often appears in discussions of understanding in epistemology. For example: Although a moderate view of understandings factivity may look promising in comparison with competitor accounts, many important details remain left to be spelled out. The advances are clearly cognitive advances. manage list views salesforce. Strevens, however, holds that than an explanation is only correct if its constitutive propositions are true, and therefore the reformulation of grasping that he provides is not intended by Strevens to be used in an actual account of understanding. Kvanvig does not spell out what grasping might involve, in the sense now under consideration, in his discussion of coherence, and the other remarks we considered above. Epistemological assumptions are those that focus on what can be known and how knowledge can be acquired (Bell, 8). University of Edinburgh Moral Understanding and Knowledge. Philosophical Studies 172(2) (2015): 113-128. He says that knowledge about a phenomenon (P) is maximally well-connected when the basing relations that obtain between the agents beliefs about P reflect the agents knowledge about the explanatory and support relations that obtain between the members of the full account of P (2015: 12). Epistemology is the study nature of human knowledge itself. Elgin, C. Exemplification, Idealization, and Understanding in M. Surez (ed. 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. This is the idea that one has shifted, or changed, the way he or she takes in knowledge. Where is the Understanding? Synthese, 2015. When considering interesting features that might set understanding apart from propositional knowledge, the idea of grasping something is often mentioned. Van Camp, W. Explaining Understanding (or Understanding Explanation. European Journal for Philosophy of Science 4(1) (2014): 95-114. Proposes an account of understandings value that is related to its connection with curiosity. If this is right, then at least one prominent case used to illustrate a luck-based difference between knowledge and understanding does not hold up to scrutiny. Bradford, G. The Value of Achievements. Pacific Philosophical Quarterly, 94(2) (2013): 204-224. Specifically, he takes his opponents view to be that knowledge through direct experience is what sates curiosity, a view that traces to Aristotle. Some (for example, Gordon 2012) suggest that attributions of propositional understanding typically involve attributes of propositional knowledge or a more comprehensive type of understandingunderstanding-why, or objectual understanding (these types are examined more closely below). Where should an investigation of understanding in epistemology take us next? To the extent that these worries with transparency are apt, a potential obstacle emerges for the prospects of accounting for the value of understanding in terms of its transparency. This holds regardless of whether we are Platonists or nominalists about such entities. Essentially, this view traditionally holds that understanding why X is the case is equivalent to knowing why X is the case (which is in turn supposed to be equivalent to knowing that X is the case because of Y). For 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? ), Scientific Understanding: Philosophical Perspectives. In other words, they claim that one cannot always tell that one understands. The next section considers some of the most prominent examples of attempts to expand on or replace a grasping condition on understanding. Disputes the popular claim that understanding is more epistemically valuable than knowledge. Grasping also allows the understander to anticipate what would happen if things were relevantly differentnamely, to make correct inferences about the ways in which relevant differences to the truth-values of the involved propositions would influence the inferences that obtain in the actual world. epistemological shift pros and cons. In so doing, he notes that the reader may be inclined to add further internalist requirements to his reliability requirement, of the sort put forward by Kvanvig (2003). The group designated explanationists by Kelp (2015) share a general commitment to the idea that knowledge of explanations should play a key role in a theory of understanding (for example, Hempel 1965; Salmon 1989; Khalifa 2012; 2013). The medical epistemology we propose conforms to the epistemological responsibility of doctors, which involves a specific professional attitude and epistemological skills. endangered species in the boreal forest; etown high school basketball roster. ), Justification and Knowledge. Contains the famous counterexamples to the Justified True Belief account of knowledge. Riggs, W. Understanding Virtue and the Virtue of Understanding In M. DePaul and L. Zagzebski (eds. reptarium brian barczyk; new milford high school principal; salisbury university apparel store Whitcomb, D. Epistemic Value In A. Cullison (ed. Keplers theory is a further advance in understanding, and the current theory is yet a further advance. He considers that grasping might be a modal sense or ability that allows the understander to, over and above registering how things are. But in this version of the case, suppose that, although the book is entirely authoritative, genuine and reliable, it is the only trustworthy book on the Comanche on the shelvesevery book on the shelves nearby, which she easily could have grabbed rather than the genuine authoritative book, was filled with rumors and ungrounded suppositions. In . We can accommodate the thought that not all beliefs relevant to an agents understanding must be true while nonetheless insisting that cases in which false beliefs run rampant will not count as understanding. Nevertheless, distinguishing between the two in this manner raises some problems for her view of objectual understanding, which should be unsurprising given the aforementioned counterexamples that can be constructed against a non-factive reading of Bakers construal of understanding-why. 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. Therefore, the need to adopt a weak factivity constraint on objectual understandingat least on the basis of cases that feature idealizationslooks at least initially to be unmotivated in the absence of a more sophisticated view about the relationship between factivity, belief and acceptance (however, see Elgin 2004). Given that the instrumental value is the same, our reaction to the two contrasting bypass cases seems to count in favor of the final value of successes because of abilityachievements. ), Fictions in Science: Essays on Idealization and Modeling. But, the chief requirement of understanding, for him, is instead that there be the right coherence-making relations in some agents collection of information (that is, that the agent has a grasp of how all this related information fits together. Contains Kims classic discussion of species of dependence (for example, mereological dependence). However, advocates of moderate approaches to the factivity of understanding are left with some difficult questions to answer. Janvid, M. Knowledge versus Understanding: The Cost of Avoiding Gettier. Acta Analytica 27 (2012): 183-197. Another seemingly promising lineone that engages with the relation question discussed aboveviews grasping as intimately connected with a certain set of abilities. Section 4 examines the relationship between understanding and types of epistemic luck that are typically thought to undermine knowledge. Knowledge in a Social World. The Nature of Ability and the Purpose of Knowledge. Philosophical Issues 17 (2007): 57-69. For example, Carter and Gordon (2011) consider that there might be cases in which understanding, and not just knowledge, is the required epistemic credential to warrant assertion. Her line is that understanding-why involves (i) knowing what something is, and (ii) making reasonable sense of it. See, however, Carter & Gordon (2014) for a recent criticism on the point of identifying understanding with strong cognitive achievement.
Carry Him Everywhere You Go Quizizz,
Uf Summer 2021 Courses,
What Does Aoa Mean In Police Terms,
Articles E