PHILOSOPHY - Epistemology: Analyzing Knowledge #3 (Causal and Reliabilist Theories) [HD]

Summary

In this video, philosopher Jenifer Nagel explores two prominent theories of knowledge: Alvin Goldman's causal theory and reliabilism. Goldman’s causal theory suggests that knowledge arises from beliefs directly caused by the facts themselves, but is challenged by cases like the 'fake barn' problem. Reliabilism, which emphasizes reliable belief-forming processes, is introduced as an alternative, though it faces objections such as the generality and lottery problems. The video provides a comprehensive overview of these theories, highlighting their complexities and the ongoing philosophical debates surrounding what constitutes true knowledge.

Takeaways

• 😀 The causal theory of knowledge, proposed by Alvin Goldman in 1967, focuses on how we know facts through experience, particularly concrete facts like events or observations in the world.
• 😀 Goldman agrees that the justified true belief (JTB) analysis works for knowledge gained through reason (e.g., arithmetic, geometry), but not for knowledge based on experience of the world.
• 😀 The causal theory of knowledge claims that knowing a fact involves having a belief that is causally connected to that fact, such as sensory perception or inference.
• 😀 A key distinction in the causal theory is that it drops the justification condition from the JTB analysis. Instead, a belief's causal connection to a fact is what determines knowledge, not whether the belief is justified.
• 😀 A critical problem with the causal theory, pointed out by Goldman, is that people may still 'know' facts even if they can't recall how they came to know them, as long as there's an appropriate causal connection between the belief and the fact.
• 😀 One of the main issues with the causal theory is illustrated through the 'fake barn' example: Henry looks at a barn in a region with many fake barns. Even though the belief is caused by a real barn, Henry's belief is unreliable because of the prevalence of fake barns.
• 😀 The unreliability of the belief-forming process in cases like Henry’s is the core problem that led Goldman to refine his theory into reliabilism.
• 😀 Reliabilism suggests that a belief is knowledge if it is formed by a reliable belief-forming process, even if the process is not foolproof or perfect.
• 😀 An important objection to reliabilism is the 'generality problem,' which questions how to properly identify the relevant belief-forming mechanism (e.g., visual perception versus specific barn-recognition).
• 😀 Another criticism of reliabilism comes from the 'lottery problem,' where someone might have a reliable belief based on probabilistic reasoning (e.g., thinking their lottery ticket lost), but intuitively might not know it yet.
• 😀 The intuitions motivating reliabilism are controversial. Some philosophers, like Ruth Millikan, disagree with Goldman’s assessment of the fake barn case and argue that Henry does indeed know he’s looking at a barn.
• 😀 The video suggests that theories of knowledge, including causal theory and reliabilism, continue to be refined and contested, and a deeper exploration into tracking theories of knowledge will be addressed in future discussions.

Q & A

What is the main focus of Jenifer Nagel's lecture?

The lecture focuses on analyzing different theories of knowledge, particularly the causal theory and reliabilism. It explores how these theories attempt to explain how we come to know facts through experience and the challenges that arise in applying them.

What is the causal theory of knowledge, according to Alvin Goldman?

The causal theory of knowledge, proposed by Alvin Goldman, states that for someone to know a fact, their belief must be causally connected to the fact itself. This theory emphasizes the importance of a belief being formed through a direct causal chain from the fact, such as sensory perception or testimony.

What was Goldman's view on the JTB (Justified True Belief) analysis of knowledge?

Goldman believed that the JTB analysis of knowledge was inadequate for explaining knowledge of concrete facts we gain through experience. While he accepted JTB for abstract fields like mathematics, he argued it did not work for facts learned through experience of the world.

How does the causal theory of knowledge address Gettier cases?

The causal theory of knowledge helps explain why people in Gettier cases (where someone has a justified true belief without knowledge) lack knowledge. In Gettier cases, the causal connection between belief and the fact is disrupted, leading to a situation where the belief may be true but is not properly connected to the actual fact.

What is the role of causal connection in the causal theory of knowledge?

In the causal theory, the belief must be causally connected to the fact. This means that the belief is formed through a process directly linked to the fact itself. For example, if someone believes that Neil Armstrong walked on the moon because of televised broadcasts, their belief has a causal connection to the fact.

What does Goldman argue about justification in the causal theory of knowledge?

Goldman argues that justification is not necessary for knowledge in his causal theory. Unlike the classical JTB analysis, the causal theory drops the justification condition, suggesting that as long as a belief is causally connected to the fact, it counts as knowledge, even if the person can't provide justification for how they came to know it.

What is the problem with Goldman's causal theory of knowledge, as illustrated by the 'fake barn' example?

The fake barn example shows a problem with the causal theory. In this case, Henry believes he is seeing a real barn, but he is actually seeing a facade in Fake Barn County, where most barns are fakes. While his belief is causally connected to a real barn, the belief-forming process is unreliable in this environment, meaning that Henry doesn't truly know he is seeing a barn.

What is reliabilism, and how does it differ from Goldman's original causal theory?

Reliabilism is a theory of knowledge that suggests knowledge arises when a belief is formed through a reliable belief-forming process. Unlike Goldman's causal theory, which focuses on the causal connection to the fact, reliabilism emphasizes that the process by which the belief is formed must generally lead to the truth, even if the process isn't perfect.

What is the generality problem in reliabilism?

The generality problem refers to the difficulty in identifying the correct belief-forming mechanism to evaluate whether a belief is reliable. It’s unclear whether to focus on a very specific mechanism (like recognizing a barn in Fake Barn County) or a more general one (like sensory perception), and this can affect whether a belief is classified as reliable or not.

What is the lottery problem, and how does it challenge reliabilism?

The lottery problem presents a situation where someone, based on high odds, believes that their lottery ticket has lost. Despite the belief being formed through a reliable process (the odds of winning), it seems that the person cannot truly know that their ticket has lost until the winning number is announced, which challenges the reliability-based foundation of reliabilism.

How do different philosophers view the fake barn example, and what does this reveal about the challenges in applying reliabilism?

Not all philosophers agree with Goldman’s intuition that Henry lacks knowledge in the fake barn example. Some philosophers, like Ruth Millikan, believe Henry does have knowledge. This disagreement highlights the subjective nature of applying theories like reliabilism, as different people may interpret the scenario differently, depending on how they understand the belief-forming process.