Combining Philosophers

Ideas for Lynch,MP/Glasgow,JM, John Locke and Jonathan Dancy

unexpand these ideas     |    start again     |     choose another area for these philosophers

display all the ideas for this combination of philosophers


6 ideas

13. Knowledge Criteria / C. External Justification / 1. External Justification
For Locke knowledge relates to objects, not to propositions [Locke, by Rorty]
     Full Idea: Locke didn't think of knowledge as true justified belief. …He considered "knowledge of" as prior to "knowledge that", and knowledge as a relation between persons and objects rather than persons and propositions.
     From: report of John Locke (Essay Conc Human Understanding (2nd Ed) [1694]) by Richard Rorty - Philosophy and the Mirror of Nature 3.2
     A reaction: This seems pretty close to Russell's 'knowledge by acquaintance'. You'd be a in a stronger position to build on this sort of thing if you were a direct realist about perception.
Externalism could even make belief unnecessary (e.g. in animals) [Dancy,J]
     Full Idea: One reading of the externalist approach may lead to a rejection of the belief condition for knowledge (in animals, perhaps).
     From: Jonathan Dancy (Intro to Contemporary Epistemology [1985], 9.3)
     A reaction: At this point the concept of 'knowledge' seems to disperse into the mist. This pushes me to a 'setting the bar high' view of knowledge. Otherwise plants will have it, and we don't want that.
13. Knowledge Criteria / C. External Justification / 2. Causal Justification
How can a causal theory of justification show that all men die? [Dancy,J]
     Full Idea: How can a causal analysis of justification show that I know that all men die?
     From: Jonathan Dancy (Intro to Contemporary Epistemology [1985], 2.3)
     A reaction: I presume he means that inductive generalisations can't be purely causal. The claim that men are immortal is absurd because it is 'unconnected' to what actually happens.
Causal theories don't allow for errors in justification [Dancy,J]
     Full Idea: Causal accounts of justification do not allow for the possibility that a false belief may still be justified.
     From: Jonathan Dancy (Intro to Contemporary Epistemology [1985], 2.4)
     A reaction: Good. If you switch to what you only think is the cause of your belief, you have gone internalist and ruined the party. You can't deny that a falsehood can be justified, or justification is vacuous.
13. Knowledge Criteria / C. External Justification / 8. Social Justification
Other men's opinions don't add to our knowledge - even when they are true [Locke]
     Full Idea: The floating of other Mens Opinions in our brains makes us not one jot the more knowing, though they happen to be true.
     From: John Locke (Essay Conc Human Understanding (2nd Ed) [1694], 1.04.23)
     A reaction: Kusch calls this thought of Locke's 'notorious'. Locke is certainly expressing extreme individualism in epistemology, and Kusch's views are the exact opposite. I'm more with Kusch.
Coherentism moves us towards a more social, shared view of knowledge [Dancy,J]
     Full Idea: An advantage of coherentism is that it directs attention away from the individual's struggle to achieve knowledge (the classical conception), and points to knowledge as a social phenomenon, shared, and increased by means of sharing.
     From: Jonathan Dancy (Intro to Contemporary Epistemology [1985], 8.3)
     A reaction: This is exactly the view which I now embrace. Internal coherence is the basis, but that spills out into the community, and into books, and into the relativity of social acceptance.