REFLECTIONS: The lesson we learnt about what knowledge is and how it is different from a belief.

One of the first things we learnt was distinguishing knowing from that from knowing how. The kind of knowledge usually discussed is propositional knowledge also known as "knowledge-that" as opposed to "knowledge-how." For example: in mathematics, it is known that 2 + 2 = 4, but there is also knowing how to add two numbers. Many philosophers therefore think there is an important distinction between "knowing that" and "knowing how". The next thing we learnt was that we should not think of knowledge this way but we must evaluate people's properties (i.e., intellectual virtues) instead of propositions' properties. This is, in short, because higher forms of cognitive success (i.e., understanding) involve features that can't be evaluated from a justified true belief view of knowledge. In addition to that, we studied “Belief” we learnt that statements of "belief" mean that the speaker predicts something that will prove to be useful or successful in some sense, perhaps the speaker might "believe in" his or her favorite football team. This is not the kind of belief usually addressed within the theory of knowledge. The kind that is dealt with is when "to believe something" simply means any cognitive content held as true. For example, to believe that the sky is blue is to think that the proposition "The sky is blue" is true. Knowledge entails belief, so the statement, "I know the sky is blue, but I don't believe it", is self-contradictory. On the other hand, knowledge about a belief does not entail an endorsement of its truth. For example, "I know about astrology, but I don't believe in it" is perfectly acceptable. It is also possible that someone believes in astrology but knows very little about it (it would be paradoxical to believe in something of which one knows absolutely nothing). Belief is a subjective personal basis for individual behavior, while truth is an objective state independent of the individual.

The last thing we learnt in class was truth. Whether someone's belief is true is not a prerequisite for someone to believe it. On the other hand, if something is actually known, then it categorically cannot be false. For example, a person believes that a particular bridge is safe enough to support them, and attempts to cross it; unfortunately, the bridge collapses under their weight. It could be said that they believed that the bridge was safe, but that this belief was mistaken. It would not be accurate to say that they knew that the bridge was safe, because plainly it was not. By contrast, if the bridge actually supported their weight then they might be justified in subsequently holding that he knew the bridge had been safe enough for his passage, at least at that particular time. For something to count as knowledge, it must actually be true. There is a sense that makes us feel that the truth should command our belief.