1.1 Tripartite view practice questions
1. Define propositional knowledge
Knowledge that, ie of true propositions e.g. I know that Johnson is the prime minister
2. Define acquaintance knowledge
Knowledge of e.g.‘I know Fred’
3. Define ability knowledge
Knowledge how e.g. I know how to ride a bike
4. What type of knowledge does the definition of knowledge refer to
Propositional knowledge
5. Outline Zagzebski’s view on the definition of knowledge
Zagzebski is sceptical about whether knowledge has a real essence. The term has varied so much
historically that the concept of knowledge itself could be a socially constructed one. Zagzebski
suggests we should seek a real definition and only give up if we are defeated in the process.
6. What does Zagzebski claim are pitfalls to avoid
ACON definitions should be avoided
Ad hoc – a definition that is specific to meeting a particular problem
Circular
Obscure
Negative
7. What is the tripartite view
Plato argues knowledge is ‘true belief accompanied by a rational account’ which is most commonly
simplified to ‘justified true belief (JTB).’ If a tour guide leads you to a town correctly, they would be a
good guide. But if equally you were travelling with a tour guide who happened to guess the way,
they would also be a good guide. From this Plato questions why should we prefer knowledge over a
true belief. He concludes that knowledge is more steadfast because it is backed up by evidence or
reasons. A belief without evidence, which may be true, has nothing to make it stick in the mind. To
have knowledge is to have a true belief secured by reasons.
8. Define necessary condition
A necessary condition is something you need in order to have the thing in question – a requirement.
E.g. a necessary condition for a triangle is be a shape.
JTB are necessary conditions:
You can’t know something if it isn’t true e.g. ‘I know the moon is made of cheese’ isn’t knowledge
because it isn’t true
, You can't know something you don’t believe e.g. ‘I know today is Monday but I don’t believe today is
Monday’ doesn’t make sense
You can’t know something you can’t justify e.g. if someone asks you what time it is randomly and
you guess it correctly. Your true belief isn’t properly justified so isn’t knowledge
9. Define sufficient conditions
Necessary conditions together (JTB) are said to be jointly sufficient
When sufficient conditions are met you will always have the thing in question
e.g. being an aunt is sufficient for having a family (you can have family without being an aunt, but an
aunt must have family)
10. Explain the criticism that the conditions are not individually necessary
#1 can you have knowledge without belief – denying something does not mean you don’t know it
A necessary condition for knowing that p is if you believe that p as it would seem to be incoherent to
say ‘I know that it is raining but I do not believe it.’ Some dispute that belief is actually a necessary
condition to honestly assert anything. So no one would assert anything without believing it. But
belief still may not be needed for knowledge. E.g. if someone answers a question correctly in class
but believes their answer is wrong, they still knew it without really believing it.
2# can you have knowledge without truth – believing in a false fact does not mean we don’t actually
know it
If I look at a clock to tell the time, and the clock happens to be one hour behind it is possible that I
know that time. This would mean that a fact does not need to be true to be known. The coherence
theory of truth claims a theory is true if beliefs support one another. With the clock example I had
no reason to believe that I wasn’t being told the correct time. Therefore I would have a justified true
belief of the wrong time.
#3 can you have knowledge without justification
In this scenario, John has a rare gift where he is able to tell you what day of the week any date in the
future will be. For example, he knows March 15 th 2123 will be a Monday. This is a case of true belief
but with no rational justification. How John gets the right answer is a mystery but he is very reliable.
Therefore justification may not always be necessary for knowledge.
11. Explain the criticism that the conditions of JTB are not jointly sufficient
Edmund Gettier cases accept that each condition may be individually necessary for knowledge, but
questions whether they are jointly sufficient. His cases doubt that having all three parts guarantee
knowledge. In the first Gettier case, Smith and Jones are interviewing for the same job. Smith hears
the interviewer say that Jones will get the job, and he also saw Jones remove ten coins from his
pocket and count them. Smith then forms the belief that the man with ten coins in his pocket will get
the job. As it turns out, Smith gets the job and, by coincidence, he also has ten coins in his pocket.
This would mean that Smith’s belief was a belief, true and justified to some extent. Despite having a
justified true belief, we do not want to say that Smith’s belief was knowledge since it relied on luck.
This shows that the tripartite definition is not sufficient.
12. Outline Gettier case 1
1. Define propositional knowledge
Knowledge that, ie of true propositions e.g. I know that Johnson is the prime minister
2. Define acquaintance knowledge
Knowledge of e.g.‘I know Fred’
3. Define ability knowledge
Knowledge how e.g. I know how to ride a bike
4. What type of knowledge does the definition of knowledge refer to
Propositional knowledge
5. Outline Zagzebski’s view on the definition of knowledge
Zagzebski is sceptical about whether knowledge has a real essence. The term has varied so much
historically that the concept of knowledge itself could be a socially constructed one. Zagzebski
suggests we should seek a real definition and only give up if we are defeated in the process.
6. What does Zagzebski claim are pitfalls to avoid
ACON definitions should be avoided
Ad hoc – a definition that is specific to meeting a particular problem
Circular
Obscure
Negative
7. What is the tripartite view
Plato argues knowledge is ‘true belief accompanied by a rational account’ which is most commonly
simplified to ‘justified true belief (JTB).’ If a tour guide leads you to a town correctly, they would be a
good guide. But if equally you were travelling with a tour guide who happened to guess the way,
they would also be a good guide. From this Plato questions why should we prefer knowledge over a
true belief. He concludes that knowledge is more steadfast because it is backed up by evidence or
reasons. A belief without evidence, which may be true, has nothing to make it stick in the mind. To
have knowledge is to have a true belief secured by reasons.
8. Define necessary condition
A necessary condition is something you need in order to have the thing in question – a requirement.
E.g. a necessary condition for a triangle is be a shape.
JTB are necessary conditions:
You can’t know something if it isn’t true e.g. ‘I know the moon is made of cheese’ isn’t knowledge
because it isn’t true
, You can't know something you don’t believe e.g. ‘I know today is Monday but I don’t believe today is
Monday’ doesn’t make sense
You can’t know something you can’t justify e.g. if someone asks you what time it is randomly and
you guess it correctly. Your true belief isn’t properly justified so isn’t knowledge
9. Define sufficient conditions
Necessary conditions together (JTB) are said to be jointly sufficient
When sufficient conditions are met you will always have the thing in question
e.g. being an aunt is sufficient for having a family (you can have family without being an aunt, but an
aunt must have family)
10. Explain the criticism that the conditions are not individually necessary
#1 can you have knowledge without belief – denying something does not mean you don’t know it
A necessary condition for knowing that p is if you believe that p as it would seem to be incoherent to
say ‘I know that it is raining but I do not believe it.’ Some dispute that belief is actually a necessary
condition to honestly assert anything. So no one would assert anything without believing it. But
belief still may not be needed for knowledge. E.g. if someone answers a question correctly in class
but believes their answer is wrong, they still knew it without really believing it.
2# can you have knowledge without truth – believing in a false fact does not mean we don’t actually
know it
If I look at a clock to tell the time, and the clock happens to be one hour behind it is possible that I
know that time. This would mean that a fact does not need to be true to be known. The coherence
theory of truth claims a theory is true if beliefs support one another. With the clock example I had
no reason to believe that I wasn’t being told the correct time. Therefore I would have a justified true
belief of the wrong time.
#3 can you have knowledge without justification
In this scenario, John has a rare gift where he is able to tell you what day of the week any date in the
future will be. For example, he knows March 15 th 2123 will be a Monday. This is a case of true belief
but with no rational justification. How John gets the right answer is a mystery but he is very reliable.
Therefore justification may not always be necessary for knowledge.
11. Explain the criticism that the conditions of JTB are not jointly sufficient
Edmund Gettier cases accept that each condition may be individually necessary for knowledge, but
questions whether they are jointly sufficient. His cases doubt that having all three parts guarantee
knowledge. In the first Gettier case, Smith and Jones are interviewing for the same job. Smith hears
the interviewer say that Jones will get the job, and he also saw Jones remove ten coins from his
pocket and count them. Smith then forms the belief that the man with ten coins in his pocket will get
the job. As it turns out, Smith gets the job and, by coincidence, he also has ten coins in his pocket.
This would mean that Smith’s belief was a belief, true and justified to some extent. Despite having a
justified true belief, we do not want to say that Smith’s belief was knowledge since it relied on luck.
This shows that the tripartite definition is not sufficient.
12. Outline Gettier case 1
