Introductory description

We tend to think that knowing things is important. Knowing things is better than being ignorant of them, and it's also better than merely having true beliefs about things. For example it's better than having a belief which is true by coincidence, or as the result of a lucky guess. But what is the difference between knowing something and not knowing it? Is knowledge true belief plus some extra ingredient? If so what is this extra ingredient? Is knowledge true belief which is justified? Which has been caused by the facts? Which couldn't easily have been false? Or perhaps knowledge is something completely different from true belief. If so what? Some sui generis kind of mental state? Some kind of ability, for example to make rational use of facts or truths? All of these have been suggested by different philosophers as general accounts of knowledge. We will assess these various accounts of knowledge. And we will look at some more specific issues too. We will consider how we get knowledge from what other people tell us, and how we are able to know the contents of other people's minds.

Module aims

Outline syllabus

This is an indicative module outline only to give an indication of the sort of topics that may be covered. Actual sessions held may differ.

1. What is Knowledge? Justified True Belief?
2. What is Knowledge? Reliably Caused True Belief?
3. What is Knowledge? Sensitive and/or Safe Belief?
4. What is Knowledge? A State of Mind?
5. What is Knowledge? A Rational Ability?
6. Knowledge of Other Minds 1
7. Knowledge of Other Minds 2
8. Knowledge by Testimony 1
9. Knowledge by Testimony 2

Learning outcomes

By the end of the module, students should be able to:

• clearly identify the particular philosophical questions with which the module is concerned
• demonstrate knowledge of some of the main theoretical approaches in epistemology, along with some of their motivations and challenges
• appreciate and engage critically with some of the methodological presuppositions underlying different approaches
• clearly state key arguments, problems, and positions, and engage with them critically, both in class and in written work
• display a good understanding of technical epistemological notions, making appropriate use of these both in discussion and written work

Indicative reading list

• Edmund Gettier, "Is Justified True Belief Knowledge?"
• Linda Zagzebski, "The Inescapability of Gettier Problems"
• Alvin Goldman, "What is Justified Belief?"
• Earl Conee and Richard Feldman, "The Generality Problem for Reliabilism"
• Timothy Williamson, "Is Knowing a State of Mind?"
• Elizabeth Fricker, "Is Knowing a State of Mind? The Case Against"
• John Hyman, "Knowledge as an Ability", Ch. 7 in /Action, Knowledge, and Will/
• John Stuart Mill, /An Examination of Sir William Hamilton's Philosophy/
• Alex Hyslop and Frank Jackon, "The Analogical Inference to Other Minds"
• Robert Pargetter, "The Scientific Inference to Other Minds"
• W.E.S. McNeill, "On Seeing that Someone is Angry"
• David Hume /On Miracles/ section X
• C.A.J. Coady, "Testimony and Observation"
• Richard Moran, "Getting Told and Being Believed"
• Elizabeth Fricker, "Against Gullibility"
• Jennifer Lackey, "It Takes Two to Tango: Beyond Reductionism and Non-Reductionism in the Epistemology of Testimony"

View reading list on Talis Aspire

Research element

The students' main assessment is a 2,500 word essay (80%). They will be expected to contribute their own research to this essay rather than to rely simply on the lecture material. Research may include sourcing additional reading material, developing one's own line of argument, discussion with peers.

Subject specific skills

Distinguishing distinctively epistemological concerns from (e.g.) psychological and metaphysical concerns.

Understanding key concepts, problems, positions, and arguments in philosophical epistemology.

Stating, constructing, and reconstructing epistemological arguments and positions.

Critically engaging with epistemological arguments and positions.

Engaging charitably with philosophical material, from lectures, peers, and the academic literature.

Jointly discussing, debating, understanding, and critiquing epistemological positions and issues in conversation with peers.

Developing a confident yet critical attitude to one's own philosophical thinking, and using this in developing one's own philosophical ideas and understanding.

Structuring a philosophical essay around a single, clear, and compelling line of argument.

Transferable skills

Pinpointing crucial distinctions and presuppositions which make a difference to the cogency of an argument or point of view.

Identifying the main points in a piece of argumentative writing or speech, understanding how these are intended to relate to one another, and what they are aimed at acheiving. Careful listening and/or reading, and note-taking in order to acheive this.

Explaining others' arguments and points of view, including when these are complex and/or challenging.

Critically assessing others' points of view, carefully, open-mindedly, and respectfully.

Assessing the cogency of one's own thinking, and developing one's clarity of thought.

Organisational, presentational, and time management skills.

Research skills: sourcing materials, note-taking, writing essay plans etc.