The word philosopher is derived from the Greek term “Philosophos,” meaning “the lover of wisdom.” It is no surprise that philosophers spend years trying to complex societal issues through the acquisition of knowledge and wisdom. Knowledge is a significant subject in philosophy. Plato defined knowledge as “justified true belief,” but not all philosophers agree on this definition. Aristotle posited that we have an obligation to acquire knowledge so that we can evaluate if we are leading a virtuous life. Alternatively, Kant states that obligation exists when there is free will. Kant explores the different types of knowledge to show that we have an obligation to acquire some form of knowledge. Acquiring knowledge is not only an obligation to self but for others as it enables one to live in harmony with others.
Pluto’s definition of knowledge as the justified true belief is the most popular definition of knowledge. The definition hold water because Pluto is the best known Greek philosopher who was a student of Socrates. Pluto wrote over 23 philosophical dialogues, including the famous Theory of Forms. The definition has been analyzed widely as it shows that knowledge has three components. Knowledge has the components of truth, belief, and justification. Pluto illustrated this definition using variables to make it easy to identify what makes up knowledge.
Delegate your assignment to our experts and they will do the rest.
Indeed, many epistemologists agree with Pluto’s definition of knowledge. They agree that the three components are necessary for knowledge, but in some cases, they are not collectively sufficient.
In 1963, Edmund Gettier, a professor of philosophy presented strong arguments against justified true belief (JTB). The arguments are now accepted, and this shows that Pluto’s definition of knowledge is lacking (Solopova, 2016). The Gettier Problem gives examples that
our beliefs can be justified but not necessarily true, for example, when we confuse a mirage for water. A person seeing the mirage is justified to believe that it is water when, in the real sense, it is not. The examples shows that there is a difference between a justified belief and knowledge. A belief is based on the individual’s personal experience, which is not similar for all rational human beings. On the other hand, knowledge is accurate because it is based on valid reasoning from personal experiences and science. Knowledge in itself is not reliant on personal experience such that every rational being can think in a particular manner.
Aristotle and Plato made a comparison between knowledge with happiness. According to Plato, happiness is the secure enjoyment of what is good and beautiful. What is good and beautiful is attained when an individual is in pursuit of exercising intellectual virtues. Aristotle expounded on his mentor’s argument on the relationship between knowledge and happiness. Aristotle contended that human beings are different from animals because of their rational capacity. This is a unique function that human beings must pursue because pleasure alone cannot bring happiness (Aufderheide, 2016). Aristotle came up with the term ‘eudaimonia’ to refer to the activity of expressing virtue or happiness. Human beings have to lead a certain kind of life and perform noble acts to be happy. Without knowledge, one cannot perform these noble acts; thus, humans have an obligation to seek knowledge.
There are notable similarities between Kant’s and Aristotle’s ideas. They both believed in ethics, morality and leading a virtuous life. They encouraged human beings to pursue self-actualization, which is the process of being the best version of self. In teleological theory, Aristotle states that individuals should maintain balance in everything they do or say. He also theorized that happiness is the primary goal of humans. Kant proposes categorical imperative as
a theory for morality. The categorical imperative is a set of ethical principles to guide individuals in their decision-making and actions. Thinking paves the way for duty, which makes individuals obey the law out of duty and not out consequences. Both philosophers attempt to show a relationship between knowledge, virtuous living and happiness.
The concepts of duty and obligation are explored in detail in philosophy. Obligation and duty are used interchangeably to refer to tasks that one has to perform. When an individual is obligated to do something, one is required to do so according to the terms and conditions in place. Philosophers such as Aristotle and Kant gave obligations for leading ethical lives. In his ethical theory, Kant states that moral law is imperative. Since the law is unconditioned, the relation of such a will to the law is dependence on obligation (Kant, 2017). The constraint to an individual action through rational principles is called duty. According to Kant, an action that is objectively practical according to the law while excluding the determining principle of inclination is a duty. An obligation is related to duty, but it is distinct. The obligation is a matter of categorical necessity.
The analytic versus synthetic knowledge is differentiated in the language used. Analytic knowledge is true in the virtue of the meaning alone, whereas synthetic knowledge is true because of their meaning and how the world perceives it (Katsafanas, 2014). Analytic knowledge has little to no informative value, for example, two halves make up whole, or ice is frozen water. Analytical knowledge has a universal meaning as the focus on logic and language use. However, a synthetic statement is founded on experience and sensory data. The actual value of synthetic statements does not rely on logic only (Xu, 2016). An example of a synthetic statement is, “the table in the dining room is round.” The sentence could be true, but it is not necessarily true in all cases.
Priori and posteriori are closely related to analytic and synthetic knowledge. According to Xu (2016), the difference between a priori and a posteriori plays a significant role in psychology. A priori is a claim that holds true in all logically possible circumstances. A statement like “all husbands are married” is an example of such a claim. There is no situation where this proposition is not valid. Propositions that are not true in all situations, such as “all cats are black,” are posteriori propositions. In most cases, synthetic propositions are posterioriori, while some analytic propositions are priori. Kant uses the distinctions in his questions concerning the history of epistemology.
Other philosophers have their definitions and approaches on the topic of knowledge. Aristotle spends his life in pursuit of knowledge. He did not just pursue knowledge; he contemplated his knowledge by examining his truths and arranging them in an orderly manner. Aristotle described the pursuit of knowledge as the highest form of human activity and ultimate intellectual virtue (Hill & Hill, 2010). Individuals who spend their lives contemplating truths engage in divine activity. Aristotle’s position is justifiable as individuals who contemplate their truths engage in sound reasoning and detailed reflection to guide their actions.
Aristotle stated that “all men by nature desire to know.” They identify a puzzle, either in natural sciences, metaphysics, or ethics, and use observation to solve these puzzles. Aristotle also emphasized on examining credible beliefs. Aristotle was a student of Plato, but he critiqued his views and the views of other Pre-Socratic philosophers in his pursuit of knowledge (Aufderheide, 2016). Aristotle recommended that these credible beliefs should be viewed as starting points in one’s quest for knowledge. Thus, the belief that human beings have an obligation to seek knowledge.
In Nicomachean Ethics, Aristotle explores the concepts of knowledge, intelligence, and wisdom in detail. According to Aristotle, the starting point of scientific knowledge is intelligence. Scientific knowledge is unchangeable necessary truths. In Chapter 6 of Nicomachean Ethics, Aristotle separates wisdom from knowledge by claiming that wisdom is the most precise and perfect form of knowledge (Hutchinson, 2015). Wisdom is a combination of intelligence and scientific knowledge. Aristotle asserts that knowledge of self is the beginning of wisdom. Aristotle takes into consideration three fundamental concepts in his theory of knowledge. The object, method, and source of knowledge determine knowledge (Hutchinson, 2015). Knowledge can be scientific or philosophical or syllogism. Philosophical knowledge can be understood by its causes, the source, and reason.
Immanuel Kant’s views on knowledge borrow and refute the views of the past philosophers. In his most significant works, The Critique of Pure Reason, he addresses the question of what is knowledge and what can we know (Palmquist, 2015). He posits that knowledge begins with experience. Human cognition is awakened by objects that their senses. Knowledge lies in the ability to compare, connect, or separate or convert the raw materials into the knowledge of objects, or preferably an experience. While he argues that knowledge begins with experience, not all forms of knowledge come from experience. Kant adds that knowledge is not constraint by Mathematics, Physics, and natural sciences. Knowledge extends to the realm of speculative metaphysics (Palmquist, 2015). To defend his argument, Kant says, “There are objects that exist in space and time outside of me” (Kant, 1990 p. 274), and they cannot be proven to be priori or posteriori.
In The Critique of Pure Reason , Kant also argues that humans are aware of their agency while sharing his views on ethics. They have the freedom to engage in something or not. One can choose to pursue knowledge or not. He adds that humans are conscious of the unconditional obligation, which guides their actions.
Kant’s argument on knowledge is neither from a rationalist or an empiricist position. Kant describes Priori as knowledge from pure reason. However, not all forms of knowledge come from pure reason or experience; some forms of knowledge comes from the transcendental unity of reason and experience. Knowledge a priori is either pure or impure. Pure priori has no empirical element, whereas impure priori has some empirical element. Kant also adds that a priori knowledge is characterized by logical necessity and universality.
While all analytic judgments are a priori, synthetic judgments can be a priori too. According to Kant, human cognitive faculties have specific forms that make it possible for things to become objects of cognition. If it is true, synthetic, a priori knowledge is possible as the forms are necessary to create any experience. Kant gives the example of Mathematics and Geometry as synthetic a priori (Kant, 2017). Mathematics and geometry rely on time and space, which are a priori. For instance, in geometry, a straight line between two points is the shortest, and this based on pure intuition of spatial relations. Specific fundamental propositions of natural sciences such as Newton’s Laws are synthetic a priori because they are based on the semi-empirical concept of matter.
Not all propositions in mathematics and geometry are synthetic a priori as much as they rely on time and space. Kant gives a few examples of synthetic a priori such as all events have a cause or everything that is a square has a shape. According to critics, the examples are universally true, and yet there are not enough examples of synthetic a priori in Mathematics, geometry or natural sciences. Mathematics does not represent synthetic a priori in entirety as synthetic a priori is an “idea of pure reason.”
Kant describes knowledge in detail to show the importance and obligation of seeking knowledge. According to Kant, the faculties of cognition entail intuition, understanding, judgment, and reason. Intuition is a lower faculty of cognition, whereas understanding, judgment, and reason are higher faculties. Individuals who fail to seek knowledge will rely on intuition or rather their impressions, and this will not help them in most situations. Understanding comes from understanding rules, while reason as the highest faculty is a source of principles that will guide an individual in decision making. As much as Kant believes in free will, humans have no choice but to pursue knowledge for themselves and others.
Kant’s synthetic a priori is a point of contention between Kant and other philosophers such as Hume and Nietzsche. Hume started that synthetic a priori is not possible, and so did Nietzsche. According to Nietzsche, synthetic a priori are among the falsest judgments. They do not represent the real world, and they do not represent experience, and since they do not represent both, they are false. Nietzsche agrees with Kant that synthetic a priori is part of what makes the experience possible, but he denies that they can tell us something about the world of experience (Hill & Hill, 2003). Nietzsche argues that Kant is either confused or mistaken in his argument on synthetic a priori, as it is neither accurate nor necessary.
Nietzsche is a skeptic, as seen in his arguments and rejection of the work of the previous philosophers. He complained about how the past philosophers insisted on working towards the highest values that can be found in the transcendental realm. Philosophers warned against seeking value in the lowly world of senses. Nietzsche responded that it is a leap of faith for philosophers to say that one believes in the transcendental realm of knowledge. He argues that judgments are human inventions, and they can be invented by anyone and interpreted differently. To support his argument, he explores the possibility of alternatives to Kantian logic, questioning the causal interpretation of the world.
According to Nietzsche, the subject/pattern of interpreting the world is a mistake, and even without alternatives, Kant failed to distinguish between invention and discovery. Nietzsche posits that mathematics are inventions that do not originate from the real world or any priori intuitions. This is an alternative interpretation that borrows from Carnap’s principle of tolerance and pragmatic consideration in language choice (Grimm, 2013).
Nietzsche’s interpretation of knowledge can be understood from his infamous phrase, “There are no facts, only interpretations.” Nietzsche was not impressed by the many assumptions in philosophies, whether it is positivism or rationalism. Philosophers make certain assumptions to support their arguments; thus, the foundation for their philosophies is not facts rather interpretations. For example, positivists state that the phenomena we observe through our senses are physical, and they also happen in the material world. Positivists interpret observed phenomena as physical when they do not have a definite justification for doing so. In reality, positivity is a result of subjective information that nothing is entirely true, rather how it fits into a particular interpretation of the person observing.
Nietzsche rejects teleology, metaphysics, and other meaningful notions of the truth to create room for “correct” interpretation. He argues that it is less important whether we understand how the world works; instead, it is crucial for us to develop an interpretation that works for us. Nietzsche argues that the apprehension of reality requires a perceiving mind. Human beings are perceivers as they have to perceive something before making the judgment, whether it is a fact or not. Unfortunately, the human mind is not passive. Humans are emotional beings when they are trying to be subjective. A fact by one human can be interpreted as an opinion by the other as they do not interpret things using the same framework.
Regardless of Nietzsche’s approach towards knowledge, his work shows that he believed in the pursuit of knowledge. For Nietzsche, facts and interpretations are tied together. Individuals pursue knowledge to be aware of these facts and to connect them with their experiences. Nietzsche started that exemplary human beings must craft their own identities through self-realization without relying on anything transcending life such as religion and spirituality. The only way to achieve self-realization is through knowledge; thus, human beings are obligated to seek knowledge. Nietzsche’s work focusses on the issues of truth and knowledge, and this shows the importance of knowledge in human life. He commented that “the importance of knowledge for life ought to appear as great as possible” (Grimm, 2013, p.89).
In conclusion, philosophers do not agree on the definition and what makes up knowledge. Pluto’s definition of knowledge as a justified true belief remains the most popular definition. Philosophers such as Aristotle, Kant, Hume, and Nietzsche build on the work of the predecessors. An analysis of their work shows that they have different perspectives; for instance, Nietzsche criticized Kant’s synthetic a priori claiming that it is irrational and that Kant was confused. Regardless, the philosophers stress the importance of seeking knowledge either for self-realization or as an obligation to others. Individuals who seek knowledge have a better understanding of the world and are in a better position to address some of the problems. Kant emphasized on the importance of different forms of knowledge, including priori, posteriori, analytic, and synthetic knowledge. Nietzsche emphasized on the importance of seeking knowledge while being cautious of our interpretation of knowledge. As a nihilist, Nietzsche advised human beings not to focus on religion or morality, but to seek knowledge.
References
Aufderheide, J. (2016). Aristotle Against Delos: Pleasure in Nicomachean Ethics X. Phronesis , 61 (3), 284-306.
Grimm, R. H. (2013). Nietzsche's theory of knowledge (Vol. 4). Walter de Gruyter.
Hill, R. K., & Hill, R. K. (2003). Nietzsche's critiques: the Kantian foundations of his thought . Oxford University Press.
Hutchinson, D. S. (2015). The virtues of Aristotle . Routledge.
Kant, I. (2017). Kant: The metaphysics of morals . Cambridge University Press.
Kant, Immanuel. Critique of Pure Reason . Translated by J.M.D. Meiklejohn. Amherst: Prometheus Books, 1990.
Katsafanas, P. (2014). Nietzsche and Kant on the will: two models of reflective agency. Philosophy and Phenomenological Research , 89 (1), 185-216.
Palmquist, S. R. (2015). Twelve basic philosophical concepts in Kant and the compound Yijing. Journal of Chinese Philosophy , 42 (1-2), 143-162.
Solopova, M. A. (2016). Aristotle on the Intellectual Virtues: On the Meaning of the Notions of Consideration (γνώμη) and Consideration for Others (συγγνώμη) in Nicomachean Ethics. Russian Studies in Philosophy , 54 (6), 519-534.
Xu, Z. (2016, September). Williamson's Challenges to the A Prori ‐ A Posteriori Distinction. In The Philosophical Forum (Vol. 47, No. 3-4, pp. 309-324).
