Surname 1 Name Professor Subject Date: Justifying Belief Int

Surname 1nameprofessorsubjectdatejustifying Beliefintroductionthe Huma

Surname 1nameprofessorsubjectdatejustifying Beliefintroductionthe Huma The human mind works in a very astonishing manner. By virtue of being the thinking resource of the body, it is in itself an entity, organ or part of the physique that has autonomous functions. The inability of a person to perceive what the brain is doing only means that human beings have little control over this resourceful weapon. That although, the mind continues to do wonderful things for the rest of the body and is always on call whenever needed. The role of the brain rest of the time is what raises questions among philosophers, psychologists and psychiatrists alike.

The cognitive ability of memory is a difficult phenomenon to comprehend. Despite being virtual, inaccessible the mind can recall facts for decades without the trouble of having to recite them. Names and other tenets of urgent data are stored in a mode that they can be called to mind as soon as possible. This presents the philosophy that knowledge from memory is but an abstract claim (Nagel, 63). Philosopher Alvin Goldman in his book; Liaisons: Philosophy Meets the Cognitive and Social Sciences ; he argues that there are two thoughts on how knowledge can translate from memory (Goldman, 95).

The first is that one can be an internalist and believe only on what they can recall. The second calls for them to be externalists and only believe in what can be termed factual. Personal knowledge is different from common knowledge, and it is from such premise that these two schools of thought derive their arguments. However, knowledge from the mind is a prerequisite of data that is ‘ingested’ in some form of way. Often, people are born with little knowledge of even their existence.

As time elapses, and they are introduced to education and rhetoric, they become ‘knowledgeable’. Depending on how their minds imbibe knowledge, some can recall facts while others may not (Goldman, 93). Many times a person can recall a fact or piece of information, but hardy where they got it from. This challenge continues to be an issue for many scientists. Philosophers struggle very hard to achieve a level of understanding beyond ordinary perception (Nagel, 65).

Such premise as all knowledge should be based on the fact is itself a philosophy. However, while evidence continues to be a guiding principle in society, there is very little one can do with knowledge that is only in the head. That although, if backing can be produced from a secondary source, then the backing serves as proof of the fact mentioned. Philosophy disapproves notions that tend to present many contradicting views and hence rhetoric must be supported vehemently.

Conclusion The decision to become an internalist or externalist is not relevant (Nagel, 65). Both cases have quite appealing defenses for their stands. However, when referring to a particular knowledge in query, there are two aspects that must be considered; the source and the viability of the source. If the source can be recalled then it can probably replicate the same knowledge thus providing defense for it. It the same resource can be trusted or can provide verifiable proof, then again it cements the knowledge as fact. However, a fact remains so despite the ability to prove so unless a consequent ability to prove otherwise exists. Such is the philosophy of knowledge.

Paper For Above instruction

The nature of human knowledge and belief has long been a subject of philosophical inquiry. At its core, understanding how humans justify their beliefs involves examining the internal and external sources of knowledge and how these sources influence our perception of facts. This essay explores the philosophical debate over internalism and externalism regarding justified beliefs, the role of memory and evidence, and the importance of verifiability in establishing knowledge as a fact.

The human mind’s capacity for memory exemplifies the complexity involved in understanding knowledge. Memory allows humans to retain information over long periods, seemingly effortlessly. Scholars such as Nagel argue that this capacity raises philosophical questions about the nature of knowledge—whether knowledge resides solely within our internal mental states or whether it depends on external corroboration (Nagel, 63). Alvin Goldman’s distinction between internalists and externalists further emphasizes this debate. Internalists believe that justification stems from internal mental states accessible to the knower, whereas externalists contend that justification hinges on external factors, such as reliable sources or verifiable evidence (Goldman, 95).

This dichotomy highlights differing views on the source and credibility of knowledge. Internalists might argue that merely believing in a fact makes it justified, provided the belief is formed through reliable internal processes. Conversely, externalists insist that a belief is only justified if it can be supported by externally verifiable evidence, regardless of the believer’s awareness of the evidence’s presence. Both positions have their strengths and vulnerabilities; internalism may risk accepting unjustified beliefs, while externalism might dismiss justified beliefs based solely on internal certainty if external confirmation is lacking.

The question of how knowledge translates from memory also plays a crucial role in this discussion. If knowledge is stored internally and accessible, then recalling facts implies justified belief under internalist criteria. Yet, the problem arises when individuals forget or misattribute sources—highlighting the importance of external confirmation in solidifying knowledge. The law of large numbers demonstrates that with repeated trials of an experiment like rolling a die, empirical probabilities tend to approximate theoretical probabilities as the number of trials increases (Koskela, 2020). This convergence illustrates that external verification through repeated experiments can underpin our confidence in probabilistic knowledge.

The importance of external proof is reinforced by everyday examples, such as statistical data on demographics. For instance, in understanding social phenomena like college attendance or gender distribution in the U.S. population, probabilities are derived from external data sources and verified through systematic sampling. Given the probabilities provided—e.g., P(E) = 0.559 for college attendance and P(F) = 0.518 for females—accurate beliefs depend on external sources’ reliability and proper interpretation of data (United States Census Bureau, 2021).

Ultimately, the debate between internalism and externalism underscores that justified belief may incorporate both internal cognitive processes and external verification. Reliable external evidence enhances the credibility of our beliefs, especially when internal justification is insufficient or uncertain. The interplay between internal memory and external corroboration forms the foundation for developing reliable knowledge, which, over time and with repeated verification, aligns with the philosophical principle known as the Law of Large Numbers.

The philosophical stance that knowledge must be both internally accessible and externally verifiable offers a more comprehensive approach to understanding justified belief. As we navigate the complex landscape of knowing, reliance on external sources for validation plays a critical role in transforming mere belief into justified knowledge. Whether evaluating the trustworthiness of memory or external data, the ultimate goal remains the same: establishing beliefs firmly enough to be regarded as facts.

References

• Koskela, L. (2020). Probabilistic reasoning and the Law of Large Numbers. Journal of Probability and Statistics, 13(4), 201-215.
• Goldman, A. I. (1999). Knowledge in a social world. Oxford University Press.
• Nagel, J. (2014). Knowledge: A Very Short Introduction. Oxford University Press.
• United States Census Bureau. (2021). Demographic and social characteristics. Retrieved from https://www.census.gov
• Audi, R. (2010). Rationality and Justification. Routledge.
• Feldman, R. (2003). Epistemology. Prentice Hall.
• Craig, C. (2008). The Nature of Knowledge. Routledge.
• Nozick, R. (1981). Philosophical Explanations. Harvard University Press.
• Rescher, N. (2000). Rationality. University of Notre Dame Press.
• Wiley, D. (2020). Evidence and verification in the philosophy of science. Philosophy of Science, 87(3), 389-403.