I would like to present some thought experiments on knowledge. If you'd like to participate, then please read each scenario carefully and answer the question(s) at the end of each scenario. Each case deals with knowledge, so when giving your answer please explain your reasoning.
Case A) Jim is panning for gold as he is very fond of doing. While panning, he sifts through and finds a nice size nugget of what appears to be gold. What Jim doesn't realize is that this area where he's panning has a certain kind of rock that looks and feels exactly like gold - it is fairly indistinguishable. Now, Jim believes that he has a piece of gold and in this case he happens to be right. So, does he know that he has a piece of gold? Why or why not?
Case B) You have just bought a lottery ticket. The odds of winning the lottery are very low (like 1 : 1 billion). Do you know that your lottery ticket will lose? Why or why not?
Case C) You park your car outside and go in to work (or to the mall or whatever). After a few hours inside, you are ready to leave. Do you know where your car is? Also, do you know that it hasn't been stolen? If you don't know that it's been stolen, can you know that your car is still there?
Case A) Yes, he knows he has a piece of gold. He is under the impression that he has a piece of gold, and it actually is a piece of gold, so he is sure that is is a piece of gold. Also, the fact that he likes looking for gold means that he will be too excited to think properly and actually begin to think that it isn't a piece of gold. In addition, Jim doesn't know that there are rocks that feel and look like gold, and that would add to his certainty that it is, in fact, a piece of gold.
Case B) No, you don't know that your ticket will lose. You only KNOW that your ticket will lose if the chances are 0%. In this case someone might have faith that their ticket will win.
Case C) You don't know that your car is stolen, and you don't know if it isn't stolen. It could be stolen, or it could be there.
A) He Does not know, but he can find out. As he so fondly likes to pan for gold, he would, or rather, should know how to distinguish between real gold and look alikes. Most metals have similar properties (conductivity, luster, etc.), and there are ways to distinguish between different types of metals through the differences in properties or those metals.
B) No, you do not know that your ticket will lose. There is a high possibility of losing, but due to the simple fact that you bought the ticket, you know you might win.
C)This was a tough one. Yes, you do know where your car is. (I think it has to do with your sunconscience.) You won't know if your car has been stolen unless you see that your car is missing, or the car alarm went off. The only way to know if the car is still there is by going to the parking spot.
Pedspog, I'm not sure if the wording of the question confused me, but I was sure that 'in this case he happens to be right.' was the answer to the question. I think Moegreche was TELLING us that it is real gold.
I think the questions will supposed to be answered using only common sense and not more advanced methods such as checking to see if it would conduct electricity.
A) He dosen't know, but he COULD find out. Last year in my Grade 7 science class, we studied properties of rocks, and each and every rock has its own unique properties. But anyway, the person could conduct tests to find out if its actually gold, like a streak test for instance.
B) Even though the chances are low, he still has a chance. After all, somebody has to win. Take this: you say the odds are 1:1 billion, but thats only if 1 billion people buy tickets. However, if only 100 people buy tickets, he has a 1:100 chance. BUT if he buys 10 tickets out of those hundred, then he has a 1/10 chance of winning.
C) If you have a good memory, yes you could find it. Many people have enough short term memory to find out the approximate place of where their car was, and then when they see it, they just go to it. You could find out if your car has its alarm gone off, because it would either be really loud, or your remote thingy would have a flashing red light. The only way to find out if its stolen however is to go to the exact spot where it was found.
Methinks this is going to become an attack on religion, but just for kicks I'll play along. Also Owen, I think you misunderstood the concept of lottery. Talking about traditional lottery, where you pick some numbers and hope you picked the right ones, not a raffle-type drawing (the odds on those vary depending on how many people play).
A) John KNOWING that he has a piece of gold and him actually HAVING a piece of gold are two different things. Does he have one? Maybe, maybe not. He won't know until he takes it to someone who will buy it. They'll either tell him it's real gold and he'll be rich, or they'll tell him it's fake and he has nothing. Either way, he hasn't lost anything, and now he's more aware of those fake gold rocks in that area.
B) I CAN win. I probably won't, but that won't stop me from buying a ticket. After all, the money does go to a good cause, and if you don't buy a ticket you are THEN assuring yourself that you can't win. The odds may be extremely low of picking the right numbers, but you
C) I live in El Paso. I don't know that it's not been stolen :P All I can really know is where I parked my car. The rest is up to fate and whether the people in Juarez wanted to take my vehicle. That being said, I lock my doors and such, so I'm fairly certain that my car is there. If it's not? Then so be it.
Hehe, this is merely an epistemological thought experiment - no attacks on religion today
Just to clarify, on Case A the rock is actually gold but in this region there is a lot of this fake gold (but Jim doesn't know that). So basically he's lucky in that he really has gold. It's also of importance that this rock is indistinguishable from gold. Also, on Case C the question is "Do you know where your car is" not "Do you know where you parked your car." One is epistemic and one is not. Thanks for all your responses, and I would enjoy reading more of them!
Case A: Jim knows. He thinks he knows, and he's right. He is not even right accidentally. Sure, there's fake gold there, but this isn't it, and he's using all of the standard ways of knowing gold to do it, so it's gold.
Case B: No, I do not know my lottery ticket will lose. Odds may be minimal but: 1) they are there and 2) someone has to win, right? I do know that in all likelihood I have a losing ticket, but I do not know for certain until the number is drawn.
Case C: Wow, nice twist to that. I know where my car was when I left, thus I know where I expect it to be. Until I get new data, I can't know otherwise. But this is a good example of why perhaps we need to loosen our thoughts on knowing, and be more ok with the reality that things are fluid and flexible.
Sorry for double posting. Brain wasn't quick enough to include these thoughts before I hit "ost."
Moegreche, what are your thoughts on your own scenarios? These look like standard scenarios from basic philosophy class, pointing out the problem of "knowing." I'm noticing that some of the responses are giving nice empirical ways of how a person could determine the truth of a given situation. however, you were not asking about truth, but what one can claim to know given only what you said... nice challenge.
A). Yes, Jim found gold. The area that he was panning, was filled with Iron Pyrite or "fools gold".. What Jim could have done to be sure, was to bite his nugget. If it was in fact gold, he would have dented the nugget. If it was Iron Pyrite, Jim would probably have a sore tooth. BUT he would know for sure!
B). Most likely you would lose. The probability of you winning is greater with more tickets. The problem with lotteries these days, is most have four to five "big winners" then many smaller prizes. But when all four big prizes are gone, they don't tell you... Instead, they add a few more prizes BUT with a different serial number that can't be sold or drawn till the other one have. Thus, making the chances almost 0.
C). No, you don't know if your car will still be there. The only thing you can do is make sure you take all the precautions to prevent theft. Meaning hiding or taking all valuables, locking the car, and closing the windows. On the other hand, if someone wanted your car that much, you probably can't prevent the theft. As for knowing where you parked, if you are at the mall remember what row you parked in, and roughly how far down. If you can't remember it, make a note on your phone or on a piece of paper.
Case A) From what I first understood, the situation was that Jim had a piece of fool's gold which he believed was gold. This sort of questions relies solomly on the perspective of which you look at it, since they are of no contradiction to one another.
BUT, as you clarified, it clearly I got it all wrong. From my new understanding, I don't understand it at all! You say "So, does he he know that he has a piece of gold? You gave the answer to your question by implying that he had no idea that the area is full of fakes, and that he believes he has the real one.
I suppose you mean, "Can he can be sure if its real?", but then thats too quite eerie of a thing...
B) This is all about impression. One can think such a small chance is almost impossible and their brain is not fooled to waste money on such things and will consider them 'impossible'. Of course, it is though. But if you had no hopes of winning, why buy the lottery ticket?
C) Again, all about impressions. Its pretty much "Do you THINK this way" Why or why not?. Well your going to be thinking that the car is there since the impression of it being stolen never comes to mind, since the chances are to low to worry about it.
The gold thing seems to keep tripping people up. Jim believes he has a piece of gold and his belief is correct - but he didn't test the rock and he doesn't know about the fake gold in the area.
Here's one just like it if you don't like the gold thing:
In Wisconsin, they're trying to make the state look more productive and the best way to do this is by building fake barns (barn facades). Tim is driving through the state when he sees what he believes to be a barn. Tim doesn't know that they've built fake barns all over the place in Wisconsin. So, Jim believes it was a barn, and in this case he is right - it was a barn. So, does he know that it was a barn?
Answer to A, B, and C: Schroedinger's cat is dead. Joking aside...
Experimental philosophy is funny. You get different answers depending on the wording and which way the scenario goes (especially in ethics).
Another take (but this one's a little different): Joe is working on his homework and gets to the last problem: 16/64 = ?. Then, he cancels out the 6's and arrrives at 1/4. Does he know this is the right answer?
Joe then checks with his calculator and gets .25 which he knows is equivalent to 1/4. Does he know this is the right answer?
Joe gets marked down for that problem. he pleads, "But I got the right answer. I even checked with my calculator." Is he right?
The teacher gives Joe a few more fractions. 26/65, 24/54, 19/95, 12/21. 26/65 does equal 2/5 and 19/95 does equal 1/5, but 4/24 and 12/21 are not 2/5 an 1/1. Now that he knows his method does not work 100%, does he know he was right about 16/64?
