FACTOID # 5: Minnesota and Connecticut are both in the top 5 in saving money and total tax burden per capita.
 
 Home   Encyclopedia   Statistics   States A-Z   Flags   Maps   FAQ   About 
   
 
WHAT'S NEW
 

SEARCH ALL

FACTS & STATISTICS    Advanced view

Search encyclopedia, statistics and forums:

 

 

(* = Graphable)

 

 


Encyclopedia > Theory of justification

Theory of justification is a part of epistemology that attempts to understand the justification of statements and beliefs. It has been suggested that this article or section be merged with Knowledge. ... Wiktionary has related dictionary definitions, such as: belief Belief is usually defined as a conviction to the truth of a proposition. ...

Contents


Introduction

Epistemologists are concerned with various epistemic features of belief, which include the ideas of justification, warrant, rationality, and probability. Of these four terms, the term that has been most widely used and discussed in the past twenty years is justification. Stephen Pepper (1942), in his "world hypothesis" theory of the history of epistemology, uses the term warrant. The theory of justification attempts to answer questions such as "What is justification?" or "When is a belief justified, and when not?" In philosophy, the word rationality has been used to describe numerous religious and philosophical theories, especially those concerned with truth, reason, and knowledge. ... The word probability derives from the Latin probare (to prove, or to test). ... This article is about the year. ...


Subjects of justification

Many things can be justified. Beliefs, actions, emotions, claims, laws, theories and so on. Epistemology focuses on beliefs. In part this is because of the influence of the Theaetetus account of knowledge as "justified true belief". More generally, the theory of justification focuses on the justification of statements or propositions. Theaetetus ( 417 B.C. – 369 B.C.) was a Greek mathematician of Geometry. ... The term statement can have several meanings: In programming, a statement is an instruction to execute something that will not return a value. ... Proposition is a term used in logic to describe the content of assertions. ...


Justification is a normative activity

One way of explaining the theory of justification is to say: A justified belief is one which we are within our rights in holding. By this is meant, not political rights, or moral rights, but "intellectual" rights.


In some way each of us is responsible for what we believe. We don't just go off and believe anything. We each have an intellectual responsibility or obligation, to believe what is true and to avoid believing what is false. Being intellectually responsible involves being within one's intellectual rights in believing something; in such cases one is justified in one's belief.


Thus, justification is a normative notion. That means that it has to do with norms, rights, responsibilities, obligations, and so forth. The standard definition is that a concept is normative if it is a concept regarding or depending on the norms, or obligations and permissions (very broadly construed), involved in human conduct. It is generally accepted that the concept of justification is normative, because it is defined as a concept regarding the norms of belief. In philosophy, normative is usually contrasted with positive, descriptive or explanatory when describing types of theories, beliefs, or statements. ... Norms are a sort of sentences or sentence meanings, the most common of which are commands and permissions. ...


Justifiers

If a belief is justified, there is something which justifies it. The thing which justifies a belief can be called its justifier. If a belief is justified, then it has at least one justifier. An example of a justifier would be some evidence that I accept. For example, if a woman is aware of the fact that her husband returned from a business trip smelling like perfume, and that his shirt has smudged lipstick on its collar, the perfume and the lipstick can be evidence for her belief that her husband is having an affair. In that case, the justifiers are all the perfume and the lipstick, or more specifically her acceptance of that evidence; the belief that is justified is her belief that her husband is having an affair. Evidence has several meanings as indicated below. ...


Not all justifiers would have to be what can properly be called "evidence"; there might be some totally different kind of justifiers out there. But to be justified, a belief has to have a justifier.


But this raises an important question: What sort of thing can be a justifier?


Three things that have been suggested are:

  1. Beliefs only.
  2. Beliefs together with other conscious mental states.
  3. Beliefs, conscious mental states, and other facts about us and our environment (which we may not have access to).

At least sometimes, the justifier of a belief is another belief. When, to return to the earlier example, the woman believes that her husband is having an affair she bases that belief on other beliefs — namely, the lipstick and perfume. Strictly speaking, her belief isn't based on the evidence itself — after all, what if she did not believe it? What if she thought that all of that evidence were just a hoax? For that matter, what if the evidence existed, but she did not know about it? Then of course, her belief that her husband is having an affair wouldn't be based on that evidence, because she did not know it was there at all; or, if she thought the evidence were a hoax, then surely her belief couldn't be based on that evidence. When a belief is based on evidence, actually what my belief is based on is another belief, namely, a belief or beliefs about the evidence.


Consider a belief P. Either P is justified, or P is not justified. If P is justified, then another belief Q may be justified by P. If P is not justified, then P cannot be a justifier for any other belief: neither for Q, nor for Q's negation.


For example, suppose someone might believe that there is intelligent life on Mars, and base this belief on a further belief, that there is a feature on the surface of Mars that looks like a face, and that this face could only have been made by intelligent life. So the justifying belief is: That face-like feature on Mars could only have been made by intelligent life. And the justified belief is: There is intelligent life on Mars. But suppose further that the justifying belief is itself totally unjustified. One would in no way be in one's intellectual rights to suppose that this face-like feature on Mars could have only been made by intelligent life; that view would be totally irresponsible, intellectually speaking. Such a belief would be unjustified. It has a justifier, but the justifier is itself not justified. A belief can only be justified by some belief which is itself justified; notably with exception of the belief that one is capable, at least in principle, to distinguish a belief which is justified from one that's not. Mars Orbital Cameras 2001 image of the face The Face on Mars is a large feature on the surface of the planet Mars located in the Cydonia region, thought by many to resemble a human face. ...


If a belief, X, is justified by another belief, Y, then Y must itself be justified.


Commonly used justifiers

See also: knowledge (philosophy) Scientific method refers to a body of techniques for the investigation of phenomena and the acquisition of new knowledge of the natural world, as well as the correction and integration of previous knowledge, based on observable, empirical, measurable evidence, and subject to laws of reasoning. ... William of Ockham Occams razor (also spelled Ockhams razor) is a principle attributed to the 14th-century English logician and Franciscan friar William of Ockham. ... In philosophy, the term empiricism is used to describe a set of philosophical positions that emphasize the role of experience. ... Induction or inductive reasoning, sometimes called inductive logic, is the process of reasoning in which the premises of an argument support the conclusion, but do not ensure it. ... To meet Wikipedias quality standards, this article or section may require cleanup. ... Probability theory is the mathematical study of probability. ... This article or section should include material from Episteme Epistemology (from the Greek words episteme=science and logos=word/speech) is the branch of philosophy that deals with the nature, origin and scope of knowledge. ...


  Results from FactBites:
 
Dramatica: The Lost Theory Book - Character Justification (2742 words)
Before the final version of "Dramatica - a New Theory of Story" there was an earlier draft which contained unfinished concepts and additional theory that was ultimately deemed "too complex".
The dismantling of Justification is the purpose and function of the Acts.
Justification is a state of mind wherein the Subjective view differs from the Objective view.
Zagzebski on Justification (2301 words)
The heart of the epistemological interest of Zagzebski’s book is found in the tasks of clarifying the natures of justification and knowledge in terms of the intellectual virtues.
In this respect, her account suffers by comparison with more standard virtue accounts, according to which the justification of a person’s belief is a result of the exercise of that very person’s intellectual virtues.
So one can have a propositionalist virtue epistemology, but the theory is obviously and hopelessly inadequate, as inadequate as a theory that picks out some actual person and evaluates all beliefs by whether that person believes the claim.
  More results at FactBites »

 
 

COMMENTARY     


Share your thoughts, questions and commentary here
Your name
Your comments

Want to know more?
Search encyclopedia, statistics and forums:

 


Press Releases |  Feeds | Contact
The Wikipedia article included on this page is licensed under the GFDL.
Images may be subject to relevant owners' copyright.
All other elements are (c) copyright NationMaster.com 2003-5. All Rights Reserved.
Usage implies agreement with terms, 1022, m