Kristi,

First off, this is a good opportunity to
mention that using all capital letters gives
the impression of SHOUTING. Please
locate the "caps lock" button on your
computer and press it so you can type
normally.

>>> listmanager@list.lanecc.edu -
10/23/02 5:08 PM >>>
From: "KRISTI BRYANT"


SO FIRST I AM HAVING A PROBLEMS
FINDING WHO FOUNDED AND IN WHAT
CENTURY WAS FOUNDED MODERN
EPISTMOLOGY.

Descartes in the 17th Century.

ALSO RELATIVISM AND THE RELATIVIST
CONCEPTION OF TRUTH.

Relativism is a theory of truth which says
that truth is relative to one's culture or to
the individual. Relativists deny there is
such a thing as "absolute truth". They
claim that there is only what's true for
one's society at a particular moment in
history or what's "true for me" and "true for
you". According to relativism there is no
such thing as what'sREALLY true apart
from peoples' beliefs. They would say, for
instance, if the majority of people
beleived that the earth was flat in
Medieval Europe, then it was "true for
them" that the earth was flat.

They thus deny the correspondance
theory of truth, which says truth is a quality
of beliefs, statements or propositions
which ACCURATELY DESCRIBE the
world or describe it THE WAY IT
ACTUALLY IS. Someone who accepts the
(common sense) correspondance theory
of truth would say that people in Medieval
Europe had a false belief about the earth
because their belief does not match up
with reality.

You might want to review the "What is
Truth?" handout on the "readings" page,
which discusses this.

THE THREE ARGUEMENTS FOR GODS
EXISTANCE ARE:
ONTOLOGICAL ARGUEMENT
PRIORI ARGUEMENT
?????? IM HAVING PROBLEMS
FFINDING THE 3RD

The arguments are in the "Notes and
Commentary" section of Meditation 3 and
Meditation 5 on the readings page.

I THOUGHT DESCARTES WASNT A
SKEPTIC BECAUSE HE WAS ONLY
EMPLOYING A SKEPTICAL METHOD,
BUT NOT EMBRACING A SKEPTICAL
CONCLUSION. (I READ SOMEONES
ANSWERS TO YOUR QUESTIONS AND
THEY SAID HE WAS A SKEPTIC)

You are correct. That was the only one he
missed :-) I posted a response to this
effect earlier.

ALSO JUST CURIOUS IF I HAVE THE
RIGHT IDEA......

TRUTH DIFFERS FROM JUSTIFICATION
AND KNOWLEDGE B/C TRUTH IS
STATMENTS AND PROPOSITIONS THAT
SOMEONE THEN HOLDS THE
PROPOSTITION TO BE TRUE, AND
JUSTIFICATION IS PROVEN
STATEMENTS SUPPORTED BY GOOD
EVIDENCE AND KNOWLEDGE IS A
ROUGHLY TRUE JUSTIFIED BELIEF.

A true statement is one which
corresponds with reality. "The cat is on
the mat" is true if the cat really is on the
mat. If the cat isnt on the mat, then it's
false. Justification is the reasons or proof
one has that the statement is true, not the
statement itself. You are justified in
believing some statement S on the basis
of reasons R1, R2, R3, etc. Your definition
of knowledge looks fine. You seem to
have a handle on the other two, but your
expression is a little jumbled.

ALSO DESCARTES WAS MOTIVATED TO
WRITE HIS FIRST MEDITATION AFTER
HE BEGAN TO OBSERVE THAT THINGS
HE USED TO BELIEVE WHEN HE WAS
YOUNG LATER TURNED OUT TO BE
FALSE.

His motivation was to write a book which
would make it safe to do science without
fear of religious persecution by
reconciling science and
religion--showing people that they need
not conflict with one another. He also
wanted to lay a foundation for the
emerging sciences.

Prof. Borrowdale