Epistemology - 25-mark Qs

Question 1

Do we have innate knowledge?

Answer 1

1. Argument (against)
   - Empiricism: the mind is a blank slate (tabula rasa); all knowledge comes through sense experience or reflection
   - No universal ideas exist
2. Response
   - Leibniz’s nativism: distinction between dispositional and actual knowledge
   - Mathematical truths are not derived from experience but uncovered by reason
3. Counter-response
   - Even if reason plays a role, doesn’t prove knowledge is innate - could be a priori

Question 2

How convincing is direct realism?

Answer 2

1. Argument (Against)
   - Illusions and hallucinations
   - Perceptual variation
   - If perception can mislead, it cannot be direct
2. Response
   - Common sense realism: perceptual errors are exceptions
   - Hallucinations are not perceptual experiences, illusions involve context-based misunderstandings
3. Counter-response
   - Difficult to distinguish hallucination from experience
   - Indirect realism can explain accuracy/error
   - Lacks tools to differentiate real/illusionary perception

Question 3

Is Berkeley’s idealist account of perception convincing?

Answer 3

1. Argument (Against)
   - Problem of continued existence
   - Berkeley’s solution - God, appears ad hoc, lacks explanatory power
2. Response
   - Solves problems in IR, no gap between perception/reality, therefore no room for scepticism
   - Idealism explains perceptual relativity
3. Counter-response
   - Just because it removes scepticism, doesn’t mean it’s true
   - Common sense strongly favours realism

Question 4

To what extent is Descartes’ intuition and deduction thesis successful?

Answer 4

1. Argument (For)
   - Descartes shows that some truths can be known with certainty through reason alone
   - e.g Maths/logic are intuitive/deductive knowledge
2. Response
   - Even intuitions may be wrong - how can we be sure clear and distinct ideas are true?
   - Reliance on God’s non-deceptiveness to guarantee the truth undermines the project - its circular
3. Counter-response
   - Can still provide a strong foundation for knowledge

Question 5

Are the claims of philosophical scepticism true?

Answer 5

1. Argument (Against)
   - Scepticism is self-defeating
   - In practice, we act as if we have knowledge; radical doubt is impractical/incoherent
2. Response
   - Scepticism isn’t claiming certainty about ignorance
   - Dreaming argument / evil demon
3. Counter-response
   - Demanding absolute certainty is unrealistic
   - Fallibilism: knowledge doesn’t require certainty, just JTB to a reasonable degree