Justified True Belief and Hypothetico-Deductive Method

Known unknowns and unknown unknowns!

Moderators: AMod, iMod

Necromancer
Posts: 238
Joined: Thu Jul 30, 2015 12:30 am
Location: Greater Oslo, Norway, Europe
Contact:

Justified True Belief and Hypothetico-Deductive Method

Post by Necromancer » Wed Jul 13, 2016 5:51 am

From Plato we have that:
Belief
Fact
Justified True Belief - effectively the whole justification of an epistemic belief

So from here, we can take this a bit further, with Hypothetico-Deductive Method (HDM).

So we simply use the definition of Plato and say this:
Belief
Fact
Justified True Belief with HDM, also a modified HDM for discoveries.

Usually one goes by books for new knowledge, implying a kind of authority to them in saying they are true. This is not good enough for us delving in epistemology. So principally we get the following:

Belief
Fact
Justified True Belief - explaining the circumstances of a discovery that's in the process of being documented or the circumstances of an experiment that's in the process of being documented the same. New knowledge is a lot of work (unless in book form, the documentation). So our Justified True Belief needs to go through the entire process of experiment/discovery so that one goes through the hypothesis of the theory, the method of achieving the discovery/the set-up of the experiment down to the results of it and the relevant observations.

In case of "Brains in Vat" argument, one finds that "Brains in Vat" is unqualified for entering as knowledge because there is no way for relating our place in the World to "Brains in Vat". This removes "Brains in Vat" from our perceived reality as well as closing off our World from "Brains in Vat" from the fact that there's no way to bridge "Brains in Vat" to our World in the way of Justified True Belief. This means we can never have knowledge of "Brains in Vat".

This can be known as "The Improved Closure Principle" starting with the history of chemistry as original and then spreading throughout the World.

wirius
Posts: 47
Joined: Sat Jun 11, 2016 9:33 pm

Re: Justified True Belief and Hypothetico-Deductive Method

Post by wirius » Thu Jul 14, 2016 12:45 am

Hey Necromancer. I love examening the JTB theory of knowledge. Could you clarify what you mean by a justified true belief?

First, what is true? How do you know what is true? Do you need a justified true belief to know a justified true belief? How do you escape the circular logic which defining truth often falls into?

Second, what is justified? Is science justified? Why?

Third, belief. What is a belief? Is it something without reason or any justification? If a belief can have justification, what separates a justified true belief from simply a justified belief?

Necromancer
Posts: 238
Joined: Thu Jul 30, 2015 12:30 am
Location: Greater Oslo, Norway, Europe
Contact:

Re: Justified True Belief and Hypothetico-Deductive Method

Post by Necromancer » Thu Jul 14, 2016 1:43 am

wirius wrote:Hey Necromancer. I love examening the JTB theory of knowledge. Could you clarify what you mean by a justified true belief?

First, what is true? How do you know what is true? Do you need a justified true belief to know a justified true belief? How do you escape the circular logic which defining truth often falls into?

Second, what is justified? Is science justified? Why?

Third, belief. What is a belief? Is it something without reason or any justification? If a belief can have justification, what separates a justified true belief from simply a justified belief?
Usually, the perceiver oneself says what is belief and perceived fact, plainly without further explanation.
Then the whole justification of this belief and this perceived (true... if any) fact to convince the readers of this report of Belief, Fact and Justified True Belief (JTB). So the justification takes care of avoiding any circular reasoning as "perceived Fact" is submitted plainly. Fx. If one Believes in seeing a green apple then Fact must correspond in order to be good, to qualify for getting deemed as knowledge, for it to start the Justification of Belief and Fact together.

Those Beliefs-Facts one wants to pass a knowledge are in the process of being Justified in order to convince readers of report to pass as knowledge. Note that one reader may be the Perceiver oneself. Confirmed/good science is usually passing as justified because of its qualifying routine through experiment/discovery by confirmation, also by Hypothetico-Deductive Method (HDM).

The Belief in this (fx. a green apple) is a simple statement and needs no Justification before the step of JTB. Remember it's in the interest of the Perceiver (the holder of the Belief) to communicate True reports of self-convinced knowledge to other readers of the threefold Belief-Fact-JTB report.

Good? :)

wirius
Posts: 47
Joined: Sat Jun 11, 2016 9:33 pm

Re: Justified True Belief and Hypothetico-Deductive Method

Post by wirius » Thu Jul 14, 2016 2:21 am

Necromancer wrote: Usually, the perceiver oneself says what is belief and perceived fact, plainly without further explanation.
Then the whole justification of this belief and this perceived (true... if any) fact to convince the readers of this report of Belief, Fact and Justified True Belief (JTB). So the justification takes care of avoiding any circular reasoning as "perceived Fact" is submitted plainly. Fx. If one Believes in seeing a green apple then Fact must correspond in order to be good, to qualify for getting deemed as knowledge, for it to start the Justification of Belief and Fact together.

Those Beliefs-Facts one wants to pass a knowledge are in the process of being Justified in order to convince readers of report to pass as knowledge. Note that one reader may be the Perceiver oneself. Confirmed/good science is usually passing as justified because of its qualifying routine through experiment/discovery by confirmation, also by Hypothetico-Deductive Method (HDM).

The Belief in this (fx. a green apple) is a simple statement and needs no Justification before the step of JTB. Remember it's in the interest of the Perceiver (the holder of the Belief) to communicate True reports of self-convinced knowledge to other readers of the threefold Belief-Fact-JTB report.

Good? :)
I'm assuming English is your second language, so let me see if I understand you correctly.

1. The perceiver decides what is belief and perceived fact.
2. The justification of the fact and the belief seems to be the belief and the fact together. So for example, because a green apple falls, and its a fact the green apple fell, one is justified in believing the green apple fell.
3. I believe earlier you were saying science was a good way for us to collaborate facts.
4. So as long as the observer is convinced in their belief, and it happens that the belief is true, then one has a JTB.

If I understand you correctly, this isn't different enough from the original JTB theory to avoid the Gettier Problem. http://www.iep.utm.edu/gettier/

Philosopher's largely agree that the Gettier problem destroyed the JTB argument for knowledge, and its many variations. "No analysis has received general assent from epistemologists, and the methodological questions remain puzzling. Debate therefore continues." (link)

Its a good try, but the Gettier argument is a tough counter-argument to beat.

Necromancer
Posts: 238
Joined: Thu Jul 30, 2015 12:30 am
Location: Greater Oslo, Norway, Europe
Contact:

Re: Justified True Belief and Hypothetico-Deductive Method

Post by Necromancer » Thu Jul 14, 2016 3:12 am

wirius wrote:I'm assuming English is your second language, so let me see if I understand you correctly.

1. The perceiver decides what is belief and perceived fact.
2. The justification of the fact and the belief seems to be the belief and the fact together. So for example, because a green apple falls, and its a fact the green apple fell, one is justified in believing the green apple fell.
3. I believe earlier you were saying science was a good way for us to collaborate facts.
4. So as long as the observer is convinced in their belief, and it happens that the belief is true, then one has a JTB.

If I understand you correctly, this isn't different enough from the original JTB theory to avoid the Gettier Problem. http://www.iep.utm.edu/gettier/

Philosopher's largely agree that the Gettier problem destroyed the JTB argument for knowledge, and its many variations. "No analysis has received general assent from epistemologists, and the methodological questions remain puzzling. Debate therefore continues." (link)

Its a good try, but the Gettier argument is a tough counter-argument to beat.
Your point 2 is wrong. One needs Justification (JTB) for the Belief-Fact-JTB to go through, to pass as knowledge.

My argument is consistent with Belief-Fact-JTB. The only new aspect is to add the HDM as standard to the JTB part of the "Belief-Fact-JTB" so that you may write "Belief-Fact-JTB with HDM".

The Gettier problem is destructive to the Probabilistic theories of Epistemology, to those who rely on Bayes' probabilities.

Please, read more carefully. Cheers! :)

Necro-

(Please, make no extra assumptions when reading this thread.)

User avatar
A_Seagull
Posts: 461
Joined: Thu Jun 05, 2014 11:09 pm

Re: Justified True Belief and Hypothetico-Deductive Method

Post by A_Seagull » Thu Jul 14, 2016 6:51 am

Is the Justified true belief theory itself justified? Is it true? How can one tell if it is true?

Necromancer
Posts: 238
Joined: Thu Jul 30, 2015 12:30 am
Location: Greater Oslo, Norway, Europe
Contact:

Re: Justified True Belief and Hypothetico-Deductive Method

Post by Necromancer » Thu Jul 14, 2016 12:59 pm

A_Seagull wrote:Is the Justified true belief theory itself justified? Is it true? How can one tell if it is true?
A_Seagull, A_Seagull, please read up!
Maybe you can start here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Epistemol ... tification and here, http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/epistemology/.

Good read. :)

User avatar
A_Seagull
Posts: 461
Joined: Thu Jun 05, 2014 11:09 pm

Re: Justified True Belief and Hypothetico-Deductive Method

Post by A_Seagull » Thu Jul 14, 2016 11:36 pm

Necromancer wrote:
A_Seagull wrote:Is the Justified true belief theory itself justified? Is it true? How can one tell if it is true?
A_Seagull, A_Seagull, please read up!
Maybe you can start here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Epistemol ... tification and here, http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/epistemology/.

Good read. :)
The whole point of having a forum is having a discussion, if you cannot do better than quote links, I have no interest in discussing the issue with you. :)

Necromancer
Posts: 238
Joined: Thu Jul 30, 2015 12:30 am
Location: Greater Oslo, Norway, Europe
Contact:

Re: Justified True Belief and Hypothetico-Deductive Method

Post by Necromancer » Fri Jul 15, 2016 11:49 am

A_Seagull wrote:Is the Justified true belief theory itself justified? Is it true? How can one tell if it is true?
Let me try again.
Is the Justified true belief theory itself justified? In my opinion, JTB becomes justified as you finish the JTB requirement of the Belief-Fact-JTB entity.
Is it true? How can one tell if it is true? Then the degree of plausibility of the JTB (how well it appeals to you) will deem the JTB (of this instance, this case) true or not (as you judge it).

Besides, I separate the issue of Truth from Epistemology to the Metaphysics, but ordinarily I consider the whole nature true as such by the descriptions of it, all the way from cattle and the rest of the animals of the zoology to the botany to genetics to the rest of consensus-science. Privately, I can't go through every experiment and every discovery to say what's true or not, but I as others lean to the reading of reports and to books of epistemic authority.

At the bottom, if truth is plausible enough I tend to buy it! I don't find reason to question truth as we commonly know the World to be. I find plausibility at the very end of all, what's most plausible rules the World, in my opinion. There's no further discussion beyond plausibility.

What about you, A_Seagull? Should we discuss truth in the Metaphysics section? At first, I must admit, I've been thinking you have been fooling with me, but now I know you're a serious guy.

Cheers! :)

User avatar
A_Seagull
Posts: 461
Joined: Thu Jun 05, 2014 11:09 pm

Re: Justified True Belief and Hypothetico-Deductive Method

Post by A_Seagull » Sat Jul 16, 2016 1:30 am

Necromancer wrote:
A_Seagull wrote:Is the Justified true belief theory itself justified? Is it true? How can one tell if it is true?
Let me try again.
Is the Justified true belief theory itself justified? In my opinion, JTB becomes justified as you finish the JTB requirement of the Belief-Fact-JTB entity.
Is it true? How can one tell if it is true? Then the degree of plausibility of the JTB (how well it appeals to you) will deem the JTB (of this instance, this case) true or not (as you judge it).

Besides, I separate the issue of Truth from Epistemology to the Metaphysics, but ordinarily I consider the whole nature true as such by the descriptions of it, all the way from cattle and the rest of the animals of the zoology to the botany to genetics to the rest of consensus-science. Privately, I can't go through every experiment and every discovery to say what's true or not, but I as others lean to the reading of reports and to books of epistemic authority.

At the bottom, if truth is plausible enough I tend to buy it! I don't find reason to question truth as we commonly know the World to be. I find plausibility at the very end of all, what's most plausible rules the World, in my opinion. There's no further discussion beyond plausibility.

What about you, A_Seagull? Should we discuss truth in the Metaphysics section? At first, I must admit, I've been thinking you have been fooling with me, but now I know you're a serious guy.

Cheers! :)

Knowledge as justified true belief, is subjective.

What qualifies as 'justification' is subjective.
'
Beliefs are inherently subjective.

Whether something is labelled as 'true' or not (and truth is little more than a label) is subjective.

So you might just as well claim that knowledge is what people consider to be 'justified true belief''

But no one believes something without some form of justification, so you can abbreviate it to "knowledge is what people consider to be true belief.

But no one holds a belief that they do not consider to be true so you can abbreviate it further to: 'Knowledge is what most people believe'.

surreptitious57
Posts: 1493
Joined: Fri Oct 25, 2013 6:09 am

Re: Justified True Belief and Hypothetico-Deductive Method

Post by surreptitious57 » Sun Jul 17, 2016 5:14 am

A Seagull wrote:
Knowledge as justified true belief is subjective

But facts by definition can only be objective

What qualifies as justification is subjective

Logic / evidence / proof / intersubjectivity

Beliefs are inherently subjective

But knowledge is not subjective

Whether something is labelled as true or not ( and truth is little more than a label ) is subjective

Not quite because there is subjective truth and there is objective truth and they are not the same

So you might just as well claim that knowledge is what people consider to be justified true belief

But no one believes something without some form of justification so you can abbreviate it to knowledge is what people consider to be true belief

The basis of any belief can be ignorance or prejudice which are not actually valid mechanisms for determining the truth value of any proposition

But no one holds a belief that they do not consider to be true so you can abbreviate it further to Knowledge is what most people believe

Necromancer
Posts: 238
Joined: Thu Jul 30, 2015 12:30 am
Location: Greater Oslo, Norway, Europe
Contact:

Re: Justified True Belief and Hypothetico-Deductive Method

Post by Necromancer » Sun Jul 17, 2016 5:57 am

Thanks, surreptitious57! :D

User avatar
A_Seagull
Posts: 461
Joined: Thu Jun 05, 2014 11:09 pm

Re: Justified True Belief and Hypothetico-Deductive Method

Post by A_Seagull » Sun Jul 17, 2016 6:31 am

[quote="surreptitious57"][quote="A Seagull"]

Whether something is labelled as true or not ( and truth is little more than a label ) is subjective

Not quite because there is subjective truth and there is objective truth and they are not the same
quote]

They are the same :)

Impenitent
Posts: 1606
Joined: Wed Feb 10, 2010 2:04 pm

Re: Justified True Belief and Hypothetico-Deductive Method

Post by Impenitent » Sun Jul 17, 2016 5:26 pm

the individual has no access to the "objective" anything...

-Imp

Necromancer
Posts: 238
Joined: Thu Jul 30, 2015 12:30 am
Location: Greater Oslo, Norway, Europe
Contact:

Re: Justified True Belief and Hypothetico-Deductive Method

Post by Necromancer » Sun Jul 17, 2016 7:34 pm

What about the inter-subjective? :D :D :D

Post Reply

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 4 guests