Phil Exam 1 (5)

Front 1

Defense

Back 1

Argument from Evil criticism:
As opposed to theodicy (which tries to explain why an all-PKG God would allow evil to exist), defense simply tries to show that we don't have a good reason to think that the premiss is true

Front 2

Moral Evil

Back 2

wrongs that are brought into existence by human actions

Front 3

Natural Evil

Back 3

evils that exist because of natural events that aren't under human control

Front 4

Object knowledge

Back 4

when the subject (S) is related to an object (person, place, or thing)
e.g. S knows the President of the United States

Front 5

Propositional Knowledge

Back 5

the object of the sentence is a proposition (something either true or false) and it is asserted that S knows that the proposition is true

Front 6

Know-how knowledge

Back 6

the knowledge of knowing how to do something
e.g. S knows how to ride a bike

Front 7

JTB Theory of Knowledge

Back 7

S knows that P if and only if
Belief 1.) S believes P
True 2.)P is true
Justified 3.)S is justified in believing P

Front 8

Problems with JTB Theory

Back 8

1.) one (or more) of the supposedly necessary conditions might not actually be necessary = too narrow, i.e. rules out things that shouldn't be ruled out
2.) the conditions are not jointly sufficient = definition is too broad; includes things that should be ruled out
(think triangle)

Front 9

Examples of JTB Theory (promotion)

Back 9

1. Smith is told Jones will get the promotion
2. Smith counts 10 coins in Jones' pocket
Therefore, the person who gets the promotion will have 10 coins in his pocket
BUT Smith gets the promotion; he also has 10 coins
--> Although he satisfies JTB he was not right

Front 10

Examples of JTB Theory (stopped clock)

Back 10

Clock stopped working exactly 24 hours ago; when I drive by it, it says the correct time of that moment
--> although it's true that the time is 8:10, the knowledge of the clock being right isn't true

Front 11

Examples of JTB Theory (lottery)

Back 11

1. odds of winning are small, so I don't believe I'll win
2. I don't win
I don't believe I'll win, I didn't win, I'm justified in believing I'm not going to win, YET my knowledge of not winning is not absolute

Front 12

axiology

Back 12

(value theory)
any philosophical issue about values: ethics, aestehtics, social, political, cultural VALUES

Front 13

modest favoring

Back 13

as opposed to the Surprise Principle (which strongly favors one hypothesis over another), modest favoring describes it when the difference between one hypothesis over another is modest

Front 14

Logical Positivism

Back 14

1.) a proposition is meaningful iff it is possible to know whether it is true or false
2.) all knowledge propositions are either knowable a priori or knowable a posteriori
3.) a proposition is knowable a priori iff it is an analytic judgment
4.) a proposition is knowable a posteriori iff it is testable