Teaching Theory of Knowledge

Paper Topics

1. In an essay of 4-8 typed, double-spaced pages, discuss the aspects listed below of the Gettier counter-example to the justified true belief theory of knowledge.
   1. Make up your own scenario to illustrate the problem, incorporating both the inference pattern of the ordinary teacher and the clever teacher.
   2. Be careful to point out exactly what chain of reasoning supports the belief in question, and whether each piece of evidence is true or false.
   3. State why the justification of the belief might plausibly be said to be complete.
   4. Show how Lehrer's fourth condition of knowledge blocks the counter-example (or fails to do so).
   5. State clearly how in the second case the belief "depends on" rather than is deduced from, a false statement.
   6. Do you believe that one can be completely justified in believing something when the belief "depends on" a false statement? (GJM)
2. In an essay of 4-8 typed, double-spaced pages, discuss the aspects listed below of Chisholm's theory of justification.
   1. Pick some ordinary perceptual propositions which you think you know, and which involve properties other than sensible characteristics of an external object. Example (what else?): The cat is on the roof.
   2. Be sure to describe the circumstances under which the knowledge claim is made.
   3. Point out what constitutes your evidence for that proposition, and at what level your evidence stands (using Chisholm's scheme) before the application of rule (G).
   4. Apply rules (G), (H), and (I) to show that your proposition is evident. Be careful to state what inductive hypotheses you use.
   5. Be sure to mention whether or not you have used any self-presenting propositions, and whether you think their use (if made) is essential.
   6. Do you think that Chisholm's rules really do establish that your proposition is one which fits his definition of "evident"? (GJM)
3. In an essay of 4-8 typed, double-spaced pages, your task is to make a rudimentary application of Lehrer's full conception of complete justification.

   In your first paper, you constructed a scenario in which a person uses probabilistic reasoning in order to completely justify a belief (which failed to satisfy the fourth condition of knowledge). You stated in intuitive terms why that person was completely justified. This time use the same example and show why the person was completely justified according to Lehrer's conception of a corrected doxastic system.

   1. Sketch the epistemic field which is taken into consideration (ignore the mechanism of disjunctive normal form, and consider only those beliefs which the person believes are negatively relevant).
   2. Assign probabilities to each of the beliefs within the field.
   3. Show how the system is corrected.
   4. Comment on whether the mechanism for generating justification in this way yields complete justification.
   5. If necessary, amend your original example to best illustrate Lehrer's way of arriving at complete justification. (GJM)