Epistemology: Introduction to Theory of Knowledge by Amon Kirui

Abstract
Epistemology, the study of knowledge, examines the nature, sources, and validity of human understanding.
Traditionally defined as "justified true belief," epistemology roots in Plato's philosophy, which emphasizes
belief, truth, and justification as essential components of knowledge. Contemporary philosophers, however,
debate the nature of knowledge, distinguishing between justifying and describing knowledge. Humans
acquire knowledge through various types, including a priori (independent of experience), a posteriori
(dependent on empirical evidence), procedural (knowledge of how to perform tasks), and propositional
(knowledge of facts). Central theories in epistemology include scepticism, empiricism, rationalism,
constructivism, pragmatism, and coherentism. Scepticism questions the possibility of knowledge,
challenging its reliability and justification, with Descartes' meditations countering global scepticism by
invoking the certainty of a benevolent God. Empiricism, championed by John Locke and David Hume,
posits that all knowledge originates from sensory experience, while rationalism, supported by Descartes
and Kant, argues for reason as the primary source of knowledge. Constructivism, linked to Piaget,
Vygotsky, and Dewey, suggests knowledge is actively constructed through individual experiences,
reflecting cultural and personal contexts. Pragmatism, emphasized by thinkers like Dewey and Peirce,
highlights the practical consequences of knowledge, asserting its validation through utility. Coherentism
focuses on consistency within belief systems as a criterion for justification. Contemporary challenges
include the Gettier problem, which critiques the sufficiency of the traditional definition of knowledge, and
contextualism, which considers the influence of situational factors on the truth-value of beliefs. Virtue
epistemology shifts the focus to the intellectual virtues of the knower. Epistemology remains foundational
in understanding belief, truth, and justification, navigating the interplay of empirical evidence, rational
deduction, and cultural perspectives to delineate the boundaries of human knowledge. This exploration
enriches our intellectual pursuits, grounding our understanding in reliable frameworks.

Introduction
Humans crave for knowledge and spend considerable time seeking it. Knowledge originates
from the word ‘to know’ which is available in all languages of the world. We get knowledge in
four key areas, that is, we can know places, people, languages and more importantly, we can
know facts. Knowledge is traditionally defined as "justified true belief," a concept rooted in
Plato's philosophy, emphasising that for someone to know something, it must be true, believed,
and justified (Moss, 2021). However, contemporary philosophers seem to define knowledge as a
way of describing the true belief. These two definitions suggest two schools of thought in the
study of epistemology; those who seek to justify knowledge (how knowledge is obtained),
against those who seek to describe knowledge (what knowledge is). For someone to know
something, they must believe it, it must be true, and they must have justification for believing it.
Belief is the propositional attitude of truth. Philosophers have long debated the nature of this
justification and the conditions under which it is met. Early epistemology, with a scientific
approach, focused heavily on justifying what we consider to be knowledge. However,
contemporary philosophers are preoccupied with proving or validating pieces of supposed
knowledge. In the quest to understand knowledge, we encounter various paradoxes involving the
relationship between knowledge and rationality, truth, belief, trust, thinking, perception,
evidence, certainty, reliability, and justification. The goal was to establish a foundation for what

1
can be considered true knowledge, separating it from mere opinion or belief. A proposition is the
content of an assertion, the underlying meaning of what we are saying. Something is true if the
propositional attitude corresponds to reality. Justification is evidence or other support for a
belief, often coming through testimony. Most of what we know is through testimony, with
another significant source being first-person observation, which is information acquired through
one's senses. For instance, if something looks, feels, and acts like a dog, then it is a dog. While
early epistemology focused on justifying knowledge scientifically, contemporary thought
increasingly examines the validation of supposed knowledge. This quest uncovers paradoxes
surrounding rationality, truth, trust, perception, evidence, and reliability. However, despite these
advancements, unresolved tensions in defining and justifying knowledge persist, raising critical
questions about the boundaries between knowledge, belief, and mere opinion. The main
objective of this study is to critically examine and evaluate how traditional and contemporary
epistemological theories shape our understanding of knowledge, with a focus on belief, truth, and
justification across various fields such as education, science, and ethics.

Problem statement
The pursuit of knowledge is a fundamental human endeavour, yet its definition, acquisition, and
justification remain contentious within philosophical discourse. Traditional epistemology, rooted
in Plato's concept of "justified true belief," establishes knowledge as requiring belief, truth, and
justification. However, this framework has faced significant challenges, particularly through
contemporary debates and counterexamples like the Gettier problem, which highlight gaps in the
traditional understanding of knowledge. The lack of consensus on what constitutes knowledge
has led to diverse theories, such as scepticism, which questions the validity of knowledge
altogether, and contextualism, which posits that the truth-value of knowledge depends on
specific contexts. Furthermore, the dichotomy between rationalism, emphasizing reason and
intellectual deduction, and empiricism, which roots knowledge in sensory experience,
underscores the complexity of defining knowledge. Complicating matters further, constructivist
and pragmatic perspectives suggest that knowledge is constructed or validated through practical
utility, challenging purely theoretical approaches. These unresolved issues have profound
implications for fields reliant on epistemic clarity, including education, science, and ethics. As
such, the problem lies in reconciling these competing theories and addressing the limitations of
existing definitions and frameworks. A deeper understanding of epistemology is therefore key to
advancing our ability to distinguish between belief, truth, and justified knowledge in a coherent
and practical manner.

Literature Review
Human beings can gain knowledge through several ways. Normally, “knowledge is represented
by facts (descriptive or propositional knowledge), skills (procedural knowledge), or objects
(direct knowledge)” (Nicolae 2022, p. 5). Other scholars such as Pritchard have identified four
different types of knowledge. The first one is a priori knowledge, which is the knowledge gained
independently of an investigation of the world through experience” (Pritchard, 2013, p. 91).
2
Priori knowledge according to Broadbent (2016), is the “knowledge that is obtained, or
obtainable, without further experience” (p. 2). Priori knowledge is gained without undergoing an
investigation. This is knowledge that is independent of experience. This is different from the
second type of knowledge, a posteriori knowledge which is gained through experience. Posteriori
knowledge is dependent on experiences accumulated over time and is founded on empirical
evidence. This type of knowledge encompasses personal, scientific, historical, and biological
facts. For example, we know that the human heart beats at 72 beats per minute through scientific
inquiry, and we know that the Second World War ended in 1945 through historical records. The
third way of gaining knowledge is known as procedural/ability knowledge. This is the
knowledge of performing certain tasks such as kicking a football. The fourth type of knowledge
is propositional knowledge. This is a knowledge of facts, a “knowledge that something (i.e. a
proposition) is the case” (Pritchard, 2013, p. 207). Propositional knowledge is “knowing-why”
(Nicolae 2022, p. 16). Epistemologists continue to pursue a deeper understanding of the nature of
knowledge, with scepticism being a significant area of concern (Allchin & Zemplén 2020).

Theories of knowledge
a. Scepticism
According to Nicolae (2022), scepticism “questions the validity of some knowledge or all human
knowledge” (p. 12). Sceptics argue that knowledge is never possible, claiming "knowledge is
impossible" (Hanon, 2021, p. 1). Scepticism questions our beliefs by scrutinising the evidence
and justification, challenging whether our beliefs are justifiable and if we can fully rely on the
available evidence. Global sceptical scenarios raise doubts literally about everything. These
include dreaming argument, evil genius, and brain-in-a-vat. However, this type of scepticism can
be narrowed down to a particular range of knowledge, example would be knowledge of the past.
This is called local scepticism. Descartes' response to scepticism, outlined in his work
‘Meditations on First Philosophy’ (1641), posits three premises: (1) Infinite ideas cannot be
produced by finite beings; (2) Infinite ideas must come from God; and (3) The universe is
governed by a benevolent and omnipotent God, ensuring that we cannot be perpetually deceived.
This reasoning aims to refute global scepticism by asserting the reliability of clear and distinct
ideas originating from a perfect, truthful God, thereby making the scenario of universal
deception impossible.
b. Empiricism
This theory is associated with philosophers like John Locke (1632–1704) and David Hume
(1711–1776), who asserts that knowledge primarily originates from sensory experiences. Both
Locke and Hume argued that humans are born with a blank slate, or tabula rasa, devoid of innate
ideas or principles. According to this view, all knowledge and understanding are derived from
experiences—either external sensory experiences as suggested by Locke or impressions,
suggested by Hume, gained through sensory perception (Clay, 2021). This empirical approach
contrasts with theories that suggest humans possess innate knowledge or principles from birth.
c. Rationalism

3
This theory is associated with René Descartes and Immanuel Kant, who claimed that reason and
intellectual deduction are the main sources of knowledge. Rationalists, according to Broadbent
(2016), believe that the “operation of reason can reveal facts not only about the mind doing the
reasoning but also about the universe” (Pritchard, 2013, p. 13). Scholars debate rationalism,
especially regarding justification. Pascal’s wager, by Blaise Pascal (1623–1662), contributes to
this debate. He argued that “if God does not exist, one will lose nothing by believing in him,
while if he does exist, one will lose everything by not believing” (Pritchard, 2013, p. 44). It is
better to believe in God and later find He never existed than not to believe and find He did, due
to the consequences (hell) and rewards (heaven).
d. Constructivism
Paavola et al. (2023) noted that constructivism suggests that knowledge is constructed by
individuals through their interactions with the world and their experiences. This theory,
associated with Jean Piaget, Lev Vygotsky, and John Dewey, argues that people actively
construct their own understanding of the universe through experience and reflection. According
to Brau (2020), “the learner must consider the information being taught and—based on past
experiences, personal views, and cultural background—construct an interpretation” (p. 1).
Constructivism has emerged as an alternative to positivism for understanding the world. Cleland
and Durning (2022) state that constructivists believe individuals cannot separate themselves from
their “beliefs, prejudices, experiences, and values” (p. 26).
e. Pragmatism
This theory, which is largely associated with Charles Sanders Peirce, John Dewey, and William
James, is premised on the “practical understandings of concrete, real-world issues” (Kelly &
Cordeiro 2020, p. 1). Knowledge, therefore, is validated by its practical consequences and
usefulness. The pragmatism “arose out of the desire to focus efforts on solving practical
problems in the real world through inquiry” (Allemang et al. 2022, p 39).
f. Coherentism
Coherentism, according to Dotsonto (2023), is the “epistemic justification of belief which argues
that circular reasoning is justified grounds for establishing truth in a fallible manner” (p. 19).
This theory assumes that beliefs are justified if they cohere with other beliefs in a consistent and
supportive system.
Contemporary issues in epistemology
Edmund Gettier challenged the sufficiency of the standard analysis of knowledge with a series of
counterexamples, all attempts to defend It has been shown either to lead to further Gettier-style
counterexamples or to produce analyses of knowledge that are not viable.
● Gettier Problem
Broadbent (2016) notes that the Gettier Problem, associated with Edmund Gettier, assumes that
“one can be justified in believing a false proposition” (p. 126). This challenges the earlier
standpoint of the traditional definition of knowledge as justified true belief. Secondly, Gettier
assumed that “knowledge is closed under known logical entailment” (p. 126) .
● Contextualism

4
Broadbent (2016) defines contextualism as the view that “whether a certain belief amounts to
knowledge depends on context” (p. 131). This theory explores the view that the truth-value of
knowledge depends on the context in which knowledge appears.
● Virtue Epistemology
According to Zagzebski (1998), virtue epistemology is the “name of a class of theories that
analyse fundamental epistemic concepts such as justification or knowledge in terms of properties
of persons rather than properties of beliefs” (p. 1). This theory focuses on the intellectual virtues
of the knower.

Research Findings
 Knowledge typologies and their impact
The study found that knowledge can be categorized into four types: a priori, a posteriori,
procedural, and propositional knowledge. A priori knowledge (knowledge independent of
experience) was seen as crucial in theoretical discussions, while a posteriori knowledge
(knowledge derived from sensory experience) dominated empirical research (Pritchard, 2013;
Nicolae, 2022). These types of knowledge are vital in understanding how humans acquire and
validate knowledge.
 The role of justification in knowledge acquisition
The research revealed that justification plays a central role in knowledge claims but is often
challenged by paradoxes such as the Gettier problem (Broadbent, 2016). Gettier's argument that
justified true belief does not always constitute knowledge illustrates the complexities involved in
defining knowledge, especially in real-world contexts (Moss, 2021).
 Philosophical approaches to knowledge
The study found that skepticism (Nicolae, 2022) remains a central issue in epistemology,
particularly in questioning whether true knowledge is even possible. Theories of empiricism
(Hume, Locke) and rationalism (Descartes, Kant) were found to provide competing frameworks
for how knowledge is formed—either from sensory experiences or intellectual reasoning (Clay,
2021).
 Knowledge acquisition and its contextual nature
Contextualism emerged as a key insight, showing that knowledge's validity can vary depending
on specific contexts. The research demonstrated how contextualism challenges static definitions
of knowledge, suggesting that knowledge claims are subject to external conditions and social
factors (Broadbent, 2016).

Results
 The interplay between belief, truth, and justification
The study’s results highlighted that contemporary epistemological debates focus more on the
validation of knowledge claims rather than their justification, suggesting that validation depends
not just on internal evidence but on the external utility or real-world applicability of the belief
(Allemang et al., 2022).
 Paradoxes and epistemic uncertainty
5
The research uncovered significant epistemic uncertainties regarding knowledge definitions.
Even within structured philosophical debates, paradoxes (like the Gettier problem) and
skepticism led to uncertainty about whether our beliefs can ever be fully justified as knowledge.
These paradoxes suggest that knowledge is not merely about accuracy but about the process of
belief validation.
 Constructivism and pragmatism in knowledge development
The results showed strong support for constructivist and pragmatist theories in education and
knowledge creation. Knowledge is seen as socially constructed, shaped by experience and
context. Furthermore, pragmatism validates knowledge based on practical outcomes, which was
found to be essential in the context of real-world applications and scientific problem-solving
(Kelly & Cordeiro, 2020).

Conclusion
In conclusion, the pursuit of knowledge is a fundamental human drive, rooted in our desire to
understand the world. Traditional definitions, such as Plato's "justified true belief," emphasise
the need for truth, belief, and justification, highlighting the rigorous criteria knowledge must
meet. Contemporary philosophers have expanded on this by exploring the nuances of true belief,
creating a discourse between those focused on justifying knowledge and those describing it. The
interplay between belief, truth, and justification forms the foundation of epistemological inquiry,
leading to the exploration of various paradoxes and validation conditions. Through testimony
and first-person observation, we gather most of our knowledge, whether through descriptive
facts, procedural skills, or direct experiences. Pritchard and Broadbent further classify
knowledge into types: a priori knowledge, which is independent of experience, and a posteriori
knowledge, which relies on empirical evidence and experience. These classifications underscore
the diverse ways we acquire knowledge, each crucial to our understanding of the world.
Ultimately, knowledge encompasses a broad spectrum of information, from personal experiences
to scientific facts, each validated through rigorous inquiry and evidence. This comprehensive
understanding enriches our intellectual pursuits, grounding our beliefs in truth and justification,
and guiding our quest for certainty and reliability.

Recommendations
 Refining knowledge theories in education
It is recommended that educational frameworks incorporate both empirical and rational
knowledge perspectives to enhance teaching and learning. This integration would allow students
to engage with both sensory experience and theoretical reasoning, providing a well-rounded
approach to knowledge acquisition.
 Addressing the Gettier problem
Further research into the Gettier problem is recommended to explore more nuanced definitions
of justified true belief. Investigating new models of knowledge that account for the contextual
nature of belief and justification will help to resolve longstanding philosophical dilemmas in
epistemology.
6
  Promoting epistemic virtue
It is recommended that virtue epistemology be integrated into both academic and professional
settings, encouraging individuals to develop intellectual virtues such as open-mindedness and
critical thinking. This would improve the process of justifying knowledge claims and refining the
validation of knowledge.
 Expanding research on knowledge types
Future research should explore the application of different types of knowledge in various fields,
including science, ethics, and the arts, to better understand how knowledge is constructed and
validated across disciplines. This research could further expand on the utility of propositional
knowledge in practical, everyday settings.

7
References
Allemang, B., Sitter, K., & Dimitropoulos, G. (2022). Pragmatism as a paradigm for patient-
oriented research. Health Expectations, 25(1), 38-47.
Allchin, D., & Zemplén, G. Á. (2020). Finding the place of argumentation in science education:
Epistemics and Whole Science. Science Education, 104(5), 907-933.
Brau, B. (2020). Constructivism. Educational Psychology.
Broadbent, A. (2016). Philosophy for Graduate Students: Metaphysics and Epistemology.
Routledge.
Cleland, J., & Durning, S. J. (Eds.). (2022). Researching Medical Education. John Wiley &
Sons.
Clay, G. (2021). Knowledge and sensory knowledge in Hume's Treatise. Journal of the History
of Philosophy, 59(3), 451-474.
Dotson, L. (2023). Knowledge and coherentism: Standardised justifications for true belief.
Anamnesis, 18, 19-34.
Hannon, M. (2021). Knowledge, concept of. The Routledge Encyclopedia of Philosophy.
Kelly, L. M., & Cordeiro, M. (2020). Three principles of pragmatism for research on
organisational processes. Methodological Innovations, 13(2), 2059799120937242.
Moss, J. (2021). Plato's Epistemology: Being and Seeming. Oxford University Press.
Nicolae, S. (2022). The Knowledge. Cambridge University Press.
Paavola, S., Lipponen, L., & Hakkarainen, K. (2023). Epistemological foundations for CSCL: A
comparison of three models of innovative knowledge communities. In Computer Support
for Collaborative Learning (pp. 24-32). Routledge.
Pritchard, D. (2013). What Is This Thing Called Knowledge? Routledge.
Zagzebski, L. T. (1998). Virtues of the Mind: An Inquiry into the Nature of Virtue and the
Ethical Foundations of Knowledge. Cambridge University Press.