Theories of Knowledge (TuTh)
Thursday, April 18
Nick Smith

skip pages 49-53 in the reading

causation (Hume- empiricist)
1 priority in time (can verify w/senses)
2 contigruity (can verify w/senses)
3 necessary connection (cannot verify)
the belief in the necessary connection comes from psychological condition

like Pavlov's dog: a bell rings every time the dogs are fed, so when they hear a bell ring, they salivate- a conditioned response.

something is necessary when we can't imagine (picture in our mind) it being false. (ex: a triangle has 3 sides)
since we CAN imagine a cause without its usual effect, the effect is not necessarily from its cause

inductive reasoning- gather evidence and come to a probable conclusion-
vs. a deduction where the conclusion follows 100% from the premises (all or nothing)
ex. of induction: "every swan i have seen is white. therefore, all swans are white."
problem of induction:
anything less than 100% certainty is mere guesswork.

criticism of Hume: living life requires induction, even if you don't believe in a material world. (out of a need to avoid pain)

Dretske- relevant alternatives argument against skepticism
zebra example- could be a disguised mule
- even though we can't (dont want to/don't need to) prove that they aren't cleverly disguised mules, we are entitled to believe they are zebras.

as long as other alternatives aren't plausible, you are justified in your belief.
contemporary approach- go from common sense examples to conclusions about the nature of knowledge.
according to Dretske, the burden of proof is on the skeptic to show particular reasons to doubt particular common sense beliefs.
- innocent until proven guilty-

how do you define a relevant or plausible alternative?
-majority belief? should everyone count equally? all cultures? all individuals?