Metaphysics substance, cause, form, potentiality Nicomachean Ethics soul, happiness, virtue, friendship Eudemain Ethics Politics best states, utopias, constitutions, revolutions Rhetoric elements of forensic and political debate Poetics tragedy, epic poetry 3. From their perspective, logic and reasoning was the chief preparatory instrument of scientific investigation. Aristotle himself, however, uses the term "logic" as equivalent to verbal reasoning. They seem to be arranged according to the order of the questions we would ask in gaining knowledge of an object.
References and Further Reading 1. The word "knowledge" and its cognates are used in a variety of ways. One common use of the word "know" is as an expression of psychological conviction. For instance, we might hear someone say, "I just knew it wouldn't rain, but then it did.
This point is discussed at greater length in section 2b below.
Even if we restrict ourselves to factive usages, there are still multiple senses of "knowledge," and so we need to distinguish between them. One kind of knowledge is procedural knowledge, sometimes called competence or "know-how;" for example, one can know how to ride a bicycle, or one can know how to drive from Washington, D.
Another kind of knowledge is acquaintance knowledge or familiarity; for instance, one can know the department chairperson, or one can know Philadelphia. Epistemologists typically do not focus on procedural or acquaintance knowledge, however, instead preferring to focus on propositional knowledge.
Propositional knowledge, then, can be called knowledge-that; statements of propositional knowledge or the lack thereof are properly expressed using "that"-clauses, such as "He knows that Houston is in Texas," or "She does not know that the square root of 81 is 9.
Propositional knowledge, obviously, encompasses knowledge about a wide range of matters: Any truth might, in principle, be knowable, although there might be unknowable truths. One goal of epistemology is to determine the criteria for knowledge so that we can know what can or cannot be known, in other words, the study of epistemology fundamentally includes the study of meta-epistemology what we can know about knowledge itself.
We can also distinguish between different types of propositional knowledge, based on the source of that knowledge. Non-empirical or a priori knowledge is possible independently of, or prior to, any experience, and requires only the use of reason; examples include knowledge of logical truths such as the law of non-contradiction, as well as knowledge of abstract claims such as ethical claims or claims about various conceptual matters.
Empirical or a posteriori knowledge is possible only subsequent, or posterior, to certain sense experiences in addition to the use of reason ; examples include knowledge of the color or shape of a physical object or knowledge of geographical locations.
Some philosophers, called rationalists, believe that all knowledge is ultimately grounded upon reason; others, called empiricists, believe that all knowledge is ultimately grounded upon experience. A thorough epistemology should, of course, address all kinds of knowledge, although there might be different standards for a priori and a posteriori knowledge.
We can also distinguish between individual knowledge and collective knowledge. Social epistemology is the subfield of epistemology that addresses the way that groups, institutions, or other collective bodies might come to acquire knowledge.
The Nature of Propositional Knowledge Having narrowed our focus to propositional knowledge, we must ask ourselves what, exactly, constitutes knowledge.
What does it mean for someone to know something? What is the difference between someone who knows something and someone else who does not know it, or between something one knows and something one does not know?
Since the scope of knowledge is so broad, we need a general characterization of knowledge, one which is applicable to any kind of proposition whatsoever. Epistemologists have usually undertaken this task by seeking a correct and complete analysis of the concept of knowledge, in other words a set of individually necessary and jointly sufficient conditions which determine whether someone knows something.
Belief Let us begin with the observation that knowledge is a mental state; that is, knowledge exists in one's mind, and unthinking things cannot know anything. Further, knowledge is a specific kind of mental state. While "that"-clauses can also be used to describe desires and intentions, these cannot constitute knowledge.
Rather, knowledge is a kind of belief. If one has no beliefs about a particular matter, one cannot have knowledge about it. For instance, suppose that I desire that I be given a raise in salary, and that I intend to do whatever I can to earn one.
Suppose further that I am doubtful as to whether I will indeed be given a raise, due to the intricacies of the university's budget and such. Given that I do not believe that I will be given a raise, I cannot be said to know that I will.
Only if I am inclined to believe something can I come to know it.Socrates Study Guide PHIL Prof. Oakes Winthrop University Readings: (general remarks), Unlike the other great Greek philosopher, Aristotle, Plato infuses much of his work with drama and passion.1 - Socrates wrote nothing (evidently); his method was entirely oral.
- Implicit in the elenchus is Socrates’ belief in a single. Direct criticism of Socrates the man almost disappears after this time, but there is a noticeable preference for Plato or Aristotle over the elements of Socratic philosophy distinct from those of his students, even into the Middle Ages.
What are the differences between the philosophies of Socrates, Plato and Aristotle? Update Cancel. Aristotle stuck to his belief that while Plato had drawn out conclusion and was just trying to reach them, he didn’t need to be worried about the conclusion as it would eventually arrive.
(ofcourse), botany, the then neuro analysis of. Aristotle is celebrated as “the master of them that know.” His stirring declaration that “All men desire by nature to know” describes his own pursuit of knowledge.
In basic agreement with Plato he maintains that “he who has beliefs is, in comparison with the one who knows, not in a healthy.
Aristotle’s logic, especially his theory of the syllogism, has had an unparalleled influence on the history of Western thought. It did not always hold this position: in the Hellenistic period, Stoic logic, and in particular the work of Chrysippus, took pride of place.
Beliefs of Socrates, Plato, and Aristotle. Socrates, Plato, and Aristotle Plato SOCRATES: Socratic Method of questioning Finding the truth the hard search for truth View on political way of governing ARISTOTLE: Classification of animals and plants Literary Analysis Definition of Tragic Hero Aristotle Socrates.