Skip to main content

Knowledge is Justified True Belief

The Tripartite Analysis of Knowledge

The tripartite analysis of knowledge has been held by many philosophers throughout history and its origin can be traced all the way back to Plato's discussion of a tripartite analysis of knowledge in the Theaetetus. There are three components to the traditional analysis of knowledge; i.e, the truth condition, the belief condition and the justification condition.

Let's go through them one by one: -

The Truth Condition

According to the tripartite analysis of knowledge, a person S can only know the subject of a proposition p if and only if the proposition p is true.

Nonetheless, sometimes what is false cannot be known, and something’s truth does not require that anyone can know or prove that it is true. 

Not all truths are established truths. If you flip a coin and never check how it landed, it may be true that it landed heads, even if nobody has any way to tell. 

Truth is a metaphysical, as opposed to epistemological. It (truth) is a matter of how things are, not how they can be shown to be. So when we say that only true things can be known, we’re not saying anything about how anyone can access the truth.

  

The Belief Condition

The tripartite analysis of knowledge states that a person S can only know the subject of a proposition p if and only if the person S believes the proposition p.

The belief condition is also controversial. The idea behind the belief condition is that you can only know what you believe. When you fail to believe in something means you do not know it. “Belief” in this context means full belief.


The Justification Condition

The tripartite analysis of knowledge states that a person S can only know the subject of a proposition p if and only if the person S is justified in believing the proposition p.

This relates to the justification condition in Plato’s Dialogue, Theaetetus, when Socrates in the dialogue points out that “true opinion” is in general insufficient for knowledge. The true opinion need to be justified with an account. 


Thus, the tripartite analysis of knowledge states that a subject S knows the proposition p if and only if

  1. proposition p is true;
  2. subject S believes proposition p;
  3. subject S is justified in believing the proposition p.


By analysing knowledge using such method means that we are stating the conditions that are individually necessary and jointly sufficient for the propositional knowledge.

Knowledge could only be considered as true if it could fulfill the three conditions.


Bibliography

Ichikawa, Jonathan Jenkins and Matthias Steup, "The Analysis of Knowledge", The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy (Summer 2018 Edition), Edward N. Zalta (ed.), URL = <https://plato.stanford.edu/archives/sum2018/entries/knowledge-analysis/>.

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Knowledge (Part II)

Continued from Knowledge (Part I)  Knowledge is the gathered understanding or awareness derived from accumulation of information, facts, concepts or skills by means of learning and experience. It provides us with the ability to utilise information and skills for making decisions, solving problems and also understanding the world. Besides of what was revealed in the Holy Quran about knowledge ( in Part 1 ), early Western philosophers such as Socrates, Plato, Aristotle, Descartes and many more have defined knowledge in their own terms. Socrates was  born circa 470 BCE in Athens and died  399  BCE. He had a unique perspective on knowledge. Despite being credited as the founder of Western philosophy, Socrates had written nothing and all information about him was gained second-hand. His thoughts were obtained through dialogues with his pupils. Socrates had emphasised on knowledge all his life.  He believed that true knowledge could only be obtained through a pr...
Post a Comment
Read more

Knowledge (Part IV)

Continued from Knowledge (Part III) Another philosopher, René Descartes ( 1596-1650), had a distinctive perspective on knowledge. He believed that knowledge was a matter of certainty, and that the only way to achieve such certainty was through rational inquiry and doubt. Rene Descartes Cogito, ergo sum Descartes is a rationalist philosopher. He was known for his method of radical doubt, which involved questioning everything he knew in order to arrive at a foundation of knowledge that could not be doubted. He believed that all knowledge should be based on indubitable, self-evident truths, or what he called "clear and distinct" ideas. In other words, knowledge had to be based on ideas that were so clear and distinct that they could not be doubted. Descartes believed that the human mind was capable of arriving at such knowledge through the use of reason alone, independent of sensory experience. He argued that this was possible because the human mind had an innate knowledge of ...
Post a Comment
Read more