The Concepts of Plato, Descartes, Locke, Lucas on the Truth of Knowledge - Literature review Example

Introduction Theories of knowledge try to explain acquisition of knowledge and how we can ascertain whether the knowledge we have is reliable. It is interesting to note that sometimes we may think we know something but in the end it turns out to be false. Researchers are always on the field trying to find new information or making discoveries and thus discrediting what we already believe to be true. Sometimes they make new discoveries which remain relevant for a long time; for example, mathematical principles rarely change one plus one will always be equal to two. The big question that need answering thus is what knowledge is and how is it acquired? Some theorists believe that people are born with while others are of the view that people are born with a mind which is an “empty slate” and acquire knowledge through experience (Lemos, 2007). He defines knowledge as “justified true belief” (p. 9). The pragmatists believe that true beliefs are useful while false beliefs are not that means knowledge as true belief should be useful. This leads us to the question whether knowledge is really useful. This can only be verified by looking at what people do with new knowledge, is helpful to the individual and the society as a whole or is it harmful? If it is beneficial to the person but harmful to others, what should the holder of knowledge do with such information? This is where the issue of ethical responsibility comes in. It helps individuals to make the proper choices depending on what is wrong or right although according to philosophers the concepts of right or wrong are relative depending on the society in which the act occurs or religion. Does the possession of knowledge carry an ethical responsibility? This is the question that we will be trying to answer in this paper. This will involve discussing various questions such as: what is knowledge? How do we acquire it? What is ethical responsibility and does possession of knowledge constitute ethical responsibility? Knowledge Despite various theories being put forward regarding knowledge, there is no consensus yet as to what knowledge is. However, the mostly accepted definition of knowledge is that it is “justified true belief” (Lemos 2007 p. 9). This is a debatable issue since truth has many meanings depending on individuals, what you might consider to be true may not be true to someone else or may be proved wrong in future. Many theories do exist that explain the concept of truth. The correspondence theory, information is true “if and only if it corresponds to facts and false if it does not correspond with facts” (Lemos 2007, p.9). As such, knowledge is based on observable facts, that is, the facts lead us to truth. For example, if a person is brown, the proposition that that person is brown is true because it is not based on what we believe but what we see (facts). In this case, the proposition cannot be true or false, it is either true or it is false for all. However, this may result in difficulties as different people see things in different ways and also facts cannot be explained without ascertaining whether they are true or false. For example, a colour blind person may view a brown person as white or black and therefore saying that the person is brown may be false for him/her. The pragmatic theory on the other hand, is of the view that true beliefs are useful while false beliefs are not useful (Lemos 2007, p. 11). As such, if a person believes that information is useful or that acting on it would be useful, then the information is true. This leads to the question whether all useful information is true. Consider a case where the doctor is propelled to give patient false information so as to save such person from harm, would this information be considered true since it is useful? Definitely not. Sometimes we are forced to give false information that would be beneficial to the people we love. For example, some people hide the information about terminal illnesses to the sick person so that he/she would not be devastated and live longer instead of despairing. Sometimes you could tell a friend something nice to avoid hurting them and making them lose their self-esteem rather than tell them the truth which would be harmful. This constitutes being ethically responsible. Sometimes, people try to justify their beliefs so that they can be considered as the truth. This is what coherence theory tries to explain as the truth or condition for truth. For knowledge to be true, it must have coherent data or propositions (Lucas, 2011). The question that needs answering is whether these coherent propositions are true in the first place. They may all be false and as such, even though they are coherent they result in falsifity rather than truth. In fact, Descartes viewed our senses as being deceptive. In his view, the set of propositions may just be hallucination or dream thus what we believe to be true is indeed false since it is based on coherent false propositions. Knowledge as stated earlier comprises justified true beliefs. Now that we know what truth is, the next question is how are these true beliefs justified? Different people have different beliefs regarding similar information depending on their experience. For example, some people believe that God exists while others do not although all indications show an existence of a supernatural being. Some believe but they are not convinced of His existence. As Lemos (2007) notes belief has varying degrees of intensity and that means knowledge varies. Lucas (2011) asserts that beliefs can be justified through evidence. If one states a proposition, then he/she should be able to bring out evidence for people to form true beliefs thus acquire knowledge. Knowledge Acquisition Various theories try to explain how knowledge is acquired. The empiricists believe that knowledge is acquired through experience. John Locke believes that people are born with nothing in their mind; it is a blank slate (Tabula rasa) thus all we know is gained through experience (Lucas, 2011). On the other hand, rationalists like Plato and Descartes believe that people are born with innate knowledge or ideas (Popkin & Stroll, 1993). The mind is not an empty slate at birth as depicted by Locke. For Plato, children have to recall platonic ideas so as to gain knowledge while Descartes views senses as deceiving. Sense experience only results in imperfect information since it is not implanted in the mind by God who is a perfect being. Since God cannot be deceiving, whatever He implants on us is true or perfect (P. 237). However, it is only fair to conclude that we are born with certain ideas while we gain more or new information through sense experience. Read More