知識是證成的信念嗎？－對蓋提爾難題的分析與討論

Is Justified Believe Knowledge: An Discuss on Gettier Problem

黃鼎元(Din-Yuang Huang)

《研究與動態》 16期 (2007/07) Pp. 85-110

摘要

傳統知識論所接受的三合一分析因為蓋提爾難題之故而遭到質疑。蓋提爾難提得名其提出者艾敦德‧蓋提爾與他的論文〈真實信念的證成即為知識嗎？〉。在文中蓋提爾透過分析三合一分析進而指出此一分析無法合理證成「S knows p」這樣類型的語句。本文的第一部份將說明蓋提爾難題的內容。第二部份將指出三種著名的解決方法，包括：齊曉姆所提出的，透過修改三合一分析就可以抵擋蓋提爾的問題；或是雷瑞與派克生透過增加第四個條件以證成其合理性；以及如古德曼所作的根本改變三合一分析與「知識」的定義。本文的第三部份將透過當代學者詹金斯來檢視此一問題。詹金斯透過中世紀學者多瑪斯‧阿奎那的哲學對此一難題提出解決與說明。最後一部份則將反省蓋提爾難題的困難所在。

關鍵字

蓋提爾難題 ； 三合一分析 ； 證成 ； 多瑪斯‧阿奎那 ； 符應理論

並列摘要

Tripartite analysis is the basic analysis to justify the using of term 'know'. But E. Gettier offered a problem in his paper 'Is Justified True Believe Knowledge' to proof that tripartite analysis didn't get justification here. And this is which we called Gettier Problem. In the first part, I'll interpret the problem. In the second part, I'll show three popular solutions on the problem, such as: (a) R. M. Chisholm with his self-present evidence in 1966, and his basic proposition, defectively evidence, and justified definition in 1983. (b) Keith Lehrer and Thomas Paxson with their defeasibility condition, basic knowledge, and nonbasic knowledge. (c) Alvin Goldman with his causal chain. The solutions I offered here are faced other questions that they can not work well. In the third part, I'll use the works from John I. Jenkins, in his Knowledge and Faith in Thomas Aquinas, he faced this problem through Thomas Aquinas and his theory of corresponding, and I believe he had a work which well done. In the last, I'll try to reflect another problem: Is Gettier Problem a real one?

並列關鍵字

Gettier Problem ； justify\justification ； tripartite analysis ； Thomas Aquinas ； theory of corresponding