Philosophy
- Please read the philosophical passage from Plato’s Gorgias 454c-d.
Soc. Then let me raise another question; there is such a thing as “having learned”?
Gor. Yes.
Soc. And there is also “having believed”?
Gor. Yes.
Soc. And is the “having learned” the same as “having believed,”. . . ? and are learning and belief the same things?
Gor. In my judgment, Socrates, they are not the same.
Soc. And your judgment is right, as you may ascertain in this way: – If a person were to say to you, “Is there, Gorgias, a false belief as well as a true?” – you would reply, if I am not mistaken, that there is.
Gor. Yes.
Soc. Well, but is there a false knowledge as well as a true?
Gor. No.
Soc. No, indeed; and this again proves that knowledge and belief differ.
Gor. Very true.
- Next, please compose a one paragraph to a page, out of class, typed, double-spaced essay, that breaks down and summarizes, in your own words, the supporting reasons and the main conclusion of the argument.
- Finally, please define and incorporate the philosophical terms knowledge (episteme) and belief (doxa) into the body of the essay.
ANSWER
Plato Gorgias
Socrates main argument from the philosophical passage as provided in Plato’s Gorgias 454c-d is that knowledge and belief are two components that greatly differ from each other. He argues out that there can be a false as well as a true belief, but there can never be false knowledge as well as true knowledge. Socrates argues out that while knowledge aims at talking about the truth, beliefs aim at achieving the greater truth that can be derived out of anything that exists. According to Socrates argument, therefore, knowledge is better suited to guide action (Burgin). For instance, if one knows the direction, they are following will lead them to Larissa, it can be difficult for someone else to convince them otherwise by claiming that they are indeed following the wrong direction that is not likely to lead them to Larissa.
On the other hand, if someone beliefs that the direction they are following will lead them to Larissa, it’s easy for someone else to approach them and convince them that they are following the wrong direction. In this case, it’s easy for someone to lose confidence and be convinced that they were indeed following the wrong direction since they only believed that they were right but instead did not know whether they were right or wrong. From this scenario, it is therefore clearly evident to conclude that it’s easy to lose a mere true belief while, on the other hand, a mere true knowledge can never be lost. Knowledge is thus more valuable than a mere true belief, according to Socrates. This is because knowledge is constant and tends not to be affected by various circumstances. At the same time, a mere true belief is variant or not fixed, implying that it can tend to differ under various circumstances and influences.
By claiming that knowledge is more valuable than a mere true belief, the primary value problem has thus been distinguished from the secondary value problem. The secondary value problem, in this case, refers to the question of why knowledge is more valuable than a belief. From an epistemic point of view, knowledge can be termed to be a justified true belief. A belief, on the other hand, can either be said to be justified/true or just be said to be false/mere belief. According to the view, it is also wise to claim that a justified true belief is way better than just a false/mere belief (Rowett). This probably explains the assumption of why knowledge is better than a true belief which answers the primary value problem hypothetically.
However, further development is required for one to understand and explain the secondary value problem, which states that knowledge is better than justified belief. Many theorists and philosophers tend to disagree and highly criticize this argument from Socrates since they do not clearly understand why he prefers to give ‘much distinctive value’ to knowledge and ‘less distinctive value’ to belief. According to these theorists, knowledge and belief should not be distinguished from each other since they are directly linked/related to each other. This implies that one of the two cannot exist without the presence of another. For instance, there must be a justified true belief for knowledge to exist, while on the other hand, knowledge must prevail for someone to distinguish between a true belief and a false belief.
Work-Cited
Burgin, Mark. Theory of Knowledge: Structures and Processes. Vol. 5. World scientific, 2016
Rowett, Catherine. Knowledge and truth in Plato: Stepping past the shadow of Socrates. Oxford University Press, 2018
