knowledge

 # Overview of Knowledge Analysis

## The Nature of Knowledge

Knowledge distinguishes between what we know and what we don’t. It involves a relationship to truth, and analyzing knowledge seeks to clarify the conditions necessary for propositional knowledge—knowledge of propositions (e.g., "Susan knows that Alyssa is a musician"). This differs from knowledge of acquaintance (knowing a person) and other forms like knowledge-how or knowledge-where.

### Propositional Knowledge

Propositional knowledge is expressed in the form “S knows that p,” where "S" is the subject and "p" is the proposition. An adequate analysis states that S knows that p if and only if certain conditions (j) are met. However, identifying these conditions is complex, as they must be both necessary and sufficient.

## Historical Context

The analysis of knowledge has been a significant topic in epistemology, particularly since the late 20th century. Despite various proposed analyses, none have gained universal acceptance, with some philosophers questioning whether knowledge can be adequately analyzed at all.

### 1. Knowledge as Justified True Belief (JTB)

The traditional tripartite analysis posits that knowledge consists of three components:

- **Truth Condition**: Only true propositions can be known.

- **Belief Condition**: One must believe the proposition.

- **Justification Condition**: The belief must be justified.

### 1.1 Truth Condition

Most epistemologists agree that false propositions cannot be known. For instance, no one knows that "Hillary Clinton won the 2016 election" because it is false.

### 1.2 Belief Condition

You cannot know something you do not believe. However, some argue that knowledge can exist without belief, as illustrated by cases like Walter, who sees his burned house but states he does not believe it.

### 1.3 Justification Condition

Justification is essential to prevent lucky guesses from counting as knowledge. A belief must be formed appropriately to qualify as knowledge.

## Challenges to JTB

### 2. Lightweight Knowledge

Some theorists propose a weaker sense of knowledge that requires only true belief, suggesting that not all knowledge must meet the full JTB criteria.

### 3. The Gettier Problem

Gettier cases demonstrate that justified true belief does not always equate to knowledge. For example, seeing a mirage of water and finding real water by luck undermines the claim to knowledge.

### 4. No False Lemmas

One proposed solution to the Gettier problem is that beliefs should not be inferred from falsehoods, but this does not universally resolve the issue.

### 5. Modal Conditions

#### 5.1 Sensitivity

A sensitivity condition states that if a proposition were false, the subject would not believe it. However, this condition fails in many Gettier cases.

#### 5.2 Safety

Safety posits that if a subject believes a proposition, it must not be false in nearby possible worlds. While appealing, it faces counterexamples that challenge its applicability.

#### 5.3 Relevant Alternatives

This theory posits that to know something, one must rule out all relevant alternatives to the proposition in question.

## Alternative Theories

### 6. Doing Without Justification?

Some theorists suggest that justification may not be necessary for knowledge, focusing instead on reliability or causal connections between belief and fact.

### 7. Is Knowledge Analyzable?

Many epistemologists have questioned whether knowledge can be effectively analyzed, especially given the persistence of Gettier problems.

### 8. Epistemic Luck

Proposals to include an anti-luck condition in the definition of knowledge aim to address issues raised by Gettier cases but are often deemed vague and problematic.

### 9. Methodological Options

New approaches to knowledge analysis consider the role of knowledge in human interactions and its practical implications rather than solely relying on intuitive cases.

### 10. Virtue-Theoretic Approaches

Sosa's virtue-theoretic approach emphasizes knowledge as a successful form of belief, where knowledge requires a skillful relationship between belief and truth.

### 11. Knowledge First

Timothy Williamson argues that knowledge is a fundamental state that should not be analyzed in terms of other concepts, suggesting that knowledge itself is foundational.

### 12. Pragmatic Encroachment

This theory posits that pragmatic factors can affect whether a subject knows something, suggesting that the importance of a question can influence knowledge.

### 13. Contextualism

Contextualism argues that knowledge attributions are context-sensitive, meaning that the standards for knowing can vary depending on the conversational context.

## Conclusion

The analysis of knowledge remains a complex and debated topic in epistemology, with various theories and counterexamples highlighting the challenges of defining what it means to "know."