For my reading, i once again went to the Stanford encyclopedia of philosophy to figure out what parts of their post i agreed with. In it, i found they made the statement that
According to TK, knowledge that p is, at least approximately, justified true belief (JTB). False propositions cannot be known. Therefore, knowledge requires truth. A proposition S doesn’t even believe can’t be a proposition that S knows. Therefore, knowledge requires belief. Finally, S‘s being correct in believing that p might merely be a matter of luck. Therefore, knowledge requires a third element, traditionally identified as justification. Thus we arrive at a tripartite analysis of knowledge as JTB: S knows that p if and only if p is true and S is justified in believing that p. According to this analysis, the three conditions — truth, belief, and justification — are individually necessary and jointly sufficient for knowledge.
(TK-traditional knowledge) – (S-Subject trying to obtain knowledge) – (P-proposition in which knowledge is to be obtained) – (JTB- justified true belief)
now, this is an interesting analysis as it seems to say that knowledge is justified true belief. However, it also says that a guessed truth that is later proven true is justified. Now, for me at least, this seems to contradict their conclusion that logic is a justified true belief. While I agree that knowledge must be believed by a person for it to be true, as what you don’t know is not a conclusion within itself, but a narrowing of the field in what conclusion you are looking for. Back to guessing truth however, someone’s true belief is reason enough for the knowledge to be known. As according to the article, guessed truths have the ability to be proven later, and you can disprove it now, but with the opportunity to be review and proven true, the true belief or any supposedly justified true belief can neither be proven nor disproven as it has the ability to be found as the opposite later on. Because of this, i believe knowledge is a person’s true belief subject to nothing but their own views through how they interpret the world. Due to the last sentence being the guiding principle of my view of knowledge, i must conclude that knowledge is also subjective as we will each interpret it our own way through our minds. This goes further for me in that with the revelation that all knowledge is interpreted by our minds, all knowledge must come from within as to be able to interpret our surroundings, we must have some innate understanding of what is going on. Therefore, i believe that as humans, we all know everything there is to know, it’s just a matter of finding the right experiences to unlock that innate understanding.