Understanding without Justification and Belief?


Authors
Seungbae Park
Ulsan National Institute Of Science And Technology
Abstract
Dellsén (2016a) argues that understanding requires neither justification nor belief. I object that ridding understanding of justification and belief comes with the following costs. (i) No claim about the world can be inferred from what we understand. (ii) We run into either Moore’s paradox or certain disconcerting questions. (iii) Understanding does not represent the world. (iv) Understanding cannot take the central place in epistemology. (v) Understanding cannot be invoked to give an account of scientific progress. (vi) It is not clear how misunderstanding arises.
Keywords Acceptance  Belief  Justification  Knowledge,  Moore’s Paradox  Understanding
Categories (categorize this paper)
Reprint years 2018
DOI 10.5007/1808-1711.2017v21n3p379
Options
Edit this record
Mark as duplicate
Export citation
Find it on Scholar
Request removal from index
Revision history

Download options

Our Archive
Through your library

References found in this work BETA

The Structure of Scientific Revolutions.Thomas S. Kuhn - 1962 - Philosophical Quarterly 14 (57):377-379.
Inference to the Best Explanation.Peter Lipton - 2004 - Philosophy and Phenomenological Research 74 (2):421-423.
Is Understanding a Species of Knowledge?Stephen R. Grimm - 2006 - British Journal for the Philosophy of Science 57 (3):515-535.
Progress and Its Problems.Larry Laudan - 1977 - Philosophy of Science 46 (4):623-644.

View all 22 references / Add more references

Citations of this work BETA

Philosophers and Scientists Are Social Epistemic Agents.Seungbae Park - 2018 - Social Epistemology Review and Reply Collective.

Add more citations

Similar books and articles

The Epistemology of Belief.Hamid Vahid - 2009 - Palgrave-Macmillan.
On the Possibility of Group Knowledge Without Belief.Raul Hakli - 2007 - Social Epistemology 21 (3):249 – 266.
Moorean Responses to Skepticism: A Defense. [REVIEW]Tim Willenken - 2011 - Philosophical Studies 154 (1):1 - 25.
How to Understand and Solve the Lottery Paradox.Patrick Bondy - 2013 - Logos and Episteme 4 (3):283-292.
Moore's Paradox and Akratic Belief.Eugene Chislenko - 2016 - Philosophy and Phenomenological Research 92 (3):669-690.
Moore's Paradox and Epistemic Norms.Clayton Littlejohn - 2010 - Australasian Journal of Philosophy 88 (1):79 – 100.
Understanding and Belief.David Hunter - 1998 - Philosophical and Phenomenological Research 58 (3):559-580.
Understanding and Belief.David Hunter - 1998 - Philosophy and Phenomenological Research 58 (3):559-580.
Does Scientific Progress Consist in Increasing Knowledge or Understanding?Seungbae Park - 2017 - Journal for General Philosophy of Science / Zeitschrift für Allgemeine Wissenschaftstheorie 48 (4):569-579.
Understanding Understanding Religious Belief.Christopher Cherry - 1974 - Religious Studies 10 (4):457 - 467.
On Dialectical Justification of Group Beliefs‖.Raul Hakli - 2011 - In Hans Bernhard Schmid, Daniel Sirtes & Marcel Weber (eds.), Collective Epistemology. Ontos. pp. 119--153.

Analytics

Added to PP index
2018-01-23

Total views
123 ( #61,055 of 2,255,279 )

Recent downloads (6 months)
55 ( #12,374 of 2,255,279 )

How can I increase my downloads?

Downloads

My notes

Sign in to use this feature